
Mazur reaction: A victory for all, says CILEX
The Court of Appeal ruling in Mazur is “a victory for CILEX members” but also for access to justice, consumers and the profession, the organisation has declared.

Lawyers on both sides see trouble ahead for motor finance redress
The FCA’s announcement of the redress scheme for motor finance claims has seen lawyers decry the impact on consumers and also predict it will be challenged in court.

Solicitor labelled “dishonest fraudster” by court struck off
A solicitor, described by a district judge as a “dishonest fraudster” who “consistently lied” to the court and to his law firm, has been struck off.

Invest in courts and legislation “to boost economic growth”
The government should invest both in the court system and new legislation to boost economic growth, a report for the Ministry of Justice has urged.

FCA issues stark warning to law firms over motor finance scheme
The FCA has promised “robust action” against law firms and CMCs that engage in “sharp practices” around the finalised motor finance compensation scheme.

Solicitor in libel battle with ex-employee over one-star reviews
A law firm owner is suing a former probate executive she employed for defamation over reviews left on two websites, as part of a wider dispute that involves another solicitor.

Barrister self-reports to BSB after citing fake cases in skeleton
A barrister has reported herself to the Bar Standards Board after submitting authorities hallucinated by artificial intelligence (AI) to the High Court.

MoJ to relax legal aid rules on remote consultations and office hours
The government is relaxing rules that control the amount of remote client consultations civil legal aid providers can offer, as well as their office opening times.

MPs: Conveyancers failing to inform home buyers of erosion risks
Conveyancers have let down home buyers by not recognising the risks of coastal erosion and landslides, MPs have said.

Tribunal orders removal of law firm’s restriction on client’s property
A tribunal has found that a law firm did not have its client’s consent to place a restriction on her property in lieu of unpaid fees.








