A really mixed edition of the Bulletin here. Lots happening with DDLS as Oliver takes over as President, hits the ground running and continues the great work that Manesha started during her year. Welcome to Felicity Coats who has agreed to be part of the committee and head up the criminal sub-committee.
We are so proud of the Derby Junior Lawyers who, as you can see, from the two major events they have pulled together on page 12 and page 16, are working hard to ensure we have lots of new DDLS committee members in the not too distant future. Look out for more
events run with DJL coming soon and please support them. The events are for everyone not just the youngsters.
On the other hand, at Quentin’s funeral, I saw one of the largest get togethers of the legal fraternity for many years. A sure sign of the high regard that Q was held in by so many. I have circulated the eulogy so beautifully presented by Karen on the day because I know a lot of people outside the church were unable to hear it. If anyone would like a copy but has not received it please e-mail me. Thank you for the donations to Quentin’s tribute page which is in aid of the MND association – this is the link if anyone would still like to contribute:
https://quentinrobbins.muchloved.com/ (Tribute to Quentin Robbins, 1962 - 2023)
Summer is traditionally quiet at DDLS but as you can see from Oliver’s piece there is plenty planned for the Autumn so please make a note of dates in your diaries. There are huge changes coming in civil practice and we will look at putting a course on locally soon but as ever if you have any requests for events, courses or fundraising ideas please let me know. I am also getting together a list of firms / individuals who would like to be sent opportunities to take part in school / charity and not for profit events etc so again if you want your name adding please let me know.
I look forward to seeing you at an event soon. Take care.
Julia
Saundersadmin@derbylaw.net 01283 734989
Officers
President*
Oliver Maxwell Nelsons 01332 378696 oliver.maxwell@nelsonslaw.co.uk
Vice-President*
Tina Attenborough Attenborough Law, Derby Tel: 01332 558508 tina@attenboroughlaw.co.uk
Immediate Past President* Manesha Ruparel Alexander & Co Solicitors LLP Tel: (01332) 600005 mr@aandco.co.uk
Deputy Vice-President* Lucy Tissington lucy.tissington@familylawgroup. co.uk
Honorary Secretary* Fiona Apthorpe Geldards LLP, Derby Tel: 01332 378335 Fiona.Apthorpe@geldards.com
(*=Ex-Officio)
Parliamentary Liaison Officer
Julie Skill, Elliot Mather LLP Chesterfield Tel: 01246 231288 julie.skill@elliotmather.co.uk
Public Relations Officer (+) Vacant
Derby Junior Lawyers Alex Needham alexander.needham@geldards. com
John Ellis john.ellis@aandco.co.uk
Laura Matthews laura.matthews@geldards.com
Constituency Council Representative, Derbyshire (+) Shama Gupta shama.gupta@freeths.co.uk
(+)attendCommitteebyinvitation
Other Committee Members Julie Skill, Elliot Mather LLP Chesterfield Tel: 01246 231288; julie.skill@elliotmather.co.uk
Tina Attenborough tina@attenboroughlaw.co.uk
Andrew Cochrane Flint Bishop, Derby Tel: 01332 340211 andrew.cochrane@flintbishop. co.uk
Diana Copestake Freeth Cartwright LLP Tel: 0845 2725674 diana.copestake@freeths.co.uk
David Hardy Tel: 01332 842008 david.hardy1630@gmail.com
Natalie Haydon-Yeung Geldards LLP 01332 331631 natalie.yeung@geldards.com
Martin Salt martinsalt@johnmlewis.co.uk
Tel: 01773 540480
Della Copley Della.copley@geldards.com
Sue Jennings Tel: (M) 07946 609436 s.jennings@derby.ac.uk
Treasurer*
Ben Lawson Elliot Mather LLP Tel: 01246 231288 ben.lawson@elliotmather.co.uk
Claire Rudkin Flint Bishop, Derby Tel: 01332 340211 claire.rudkin@flintbishop.co.uk
Simon Stevens
Eddowes Waldron 01332 348484 sws@ewlaw.co.uk
Chloe Summers chloe.summers@nelsonslaw.co.uk
Solicitors’ Benevolent Assoc. area representative Peter Lord 9 Larkhill, Swanwick DE55 1DD Tel: 01773 541753
Administrator / Bulletin Editor
Julia Saunders, 14 Risborrow Close, Etwall, Derby DE65 6HY
Tel: 01283 734989 Mobile: 07964 358042
Email: admin@derbylaw.net
Sub-Committees (Secretaryinitalics)
Criminal Litigation SimonStevens
Andy Cash Felicity Coats felicity.coats@elliotmather.co.uk
Andrew Oldroyd (01332 225225)
Education & Training SueJennings, & all Sub-Committee Secretaries
Employment and Business Law SueJennings
Tina Attenborough tina@attenboroughlaw.co.uk
Equality, Diversity and Inclusion ManeshaRuparel mr@aandco.co.uk
Tina Attenborough tina@attenboroughlaw.co.uk
Sue Jennings s.jennings@derby.ac.uk
Natalie Haydon-Yeung natalie.yeung@geldards.com
Family Law FionaApthorpe
David Guthrie dg@aflp.co.uk
Diana Copestake diana.copestake@freeths.co.uk
Fiona Apthorpe Fiona.Apthorpe@geldards.com
Fiona Lazenby fiona.lazenby@knightsplc.com
Julie Skill Julie.Skill@elliotmather.co.uk
Kelly Mower kellym@eglegal.co.uk
Liz Guyler lizguyler@eglegal.co.uk
Lucy Tissington lucy.tissington@familylawgroup. co.uk
Melanie Bridgen melanie.bridgen@nelsonslaw. co.uk
Natalie Haydon-Yeung Natalie.Haydon-Yeung@geldards. com
Nick Herbert nh@aflp.co.uk
Ruth Jones ruth.jones@smithpartnership. co.uk
Sole Practitioners’ Group (SPG) TinaAttenborough
Lastupdated15.05.23
It’s been a busy start to my presidential year. Although slightly hampered by an unexpected bout of ill health, I am pleased to report that I am now on the mend and eager to build upon the foundations laid by Manesha during her impressive tenure as DDLS president.
This year, our AGM fell on the same day as the legal skills triathlon which the society runs in conjunction with the law school at the University of Derby. I judged the “negotiation” module of the competition and, as usual, the quality of the participants was excellent. Being involved in the triathlon is rewarding in itself, but it also demonstrates the quality of the up-andcoming talent being trained in our local university. Long may the society’s triathlon partnership with the University continue and long may we seek to retain our local talent.
After the triathlon, I met with a representative from the Institute of Chartered Accounts (ICA) immediately before the AGM to discuss the possibility of organising “joint” events to bring the legal and accountancy communities closer together. I am pleased to report that the meeting was positive and there seems to be considerable appetite on the ICA’s part to collaborate with the society.
Then there was the AGM. The liveliest AGM in years. An AGM which, amongst other things, took us one step closer to altering the way in which the membership is structured. Despite calls to increase the membership fee this year, we agreed to freeze it again at its current level before resolving to move towards a more firmbased approach to membership next
year. The executive committee and I are currently working on the fee proposals which will be released to the member firms towards Christmas.
Quite quickly after the AGM, I attended the Leicestershire Law Society annual awards dinner at Winstanley House. The Leicestershire president, Gina SamuelRichards, was an incredible host and I was very grateful for the time she took to speak with me. My congratulations go out to all the winners, but it would be remiss of me not to mention one of our member firms who won the “Large Law Firm of the Year” award. Congratulations to the Smith Partnership on your well-deserved success.
The following week, I attended the Law Society Presidents’ day at the King Power Stadium to watch the Leicester v West Ham match. The event was organised by DG
Legal and we enjoyed an afternoon of good food and good company. There, I caught up with the immediate past-president of the Nottinghamshire law society, Janine McKinney, and met Bhumika Parmar from the Leicestershire Law Society. I also met our national Law Society president Lubna Shuja for the first time face-to-face. It was a great opportunity to discuss ways in which both the regional and national societies can support each other and the profession more generally. My particular thanks go to David Gilmore for the invite and for allowing us to use the DG Legal executive box.
In addition to my presidential engagements, both the society and the Derby Junior Lawyers (DJL) have been busy organising events and offering professional support to our members. Most recently, our newly formed Property Law Professionals (PLP) Network held its second event at
Nelsons. This time, as well as being given an opportunity to network, the attendees heard talks delivered by Grace Golden from Pretzel Energy and Paul Hinchley-Bradshaw from Signature Funding. My thanks to Rachel Maxwell from Nelsons for organising. On the same day, the DJL organised the Derby Legal Walk to raise money for the Access to Justice Foundation. It is always a very well attended event starting at the University and ending with a well-deserved drink at the Orange Tree. The weather, just like last year, was hot and I give my thanks to the Smith Partnership for providing all the participants with bottled water and granola bars to pull them through. To date, we have raised just under £1,500.00 and there is still time to donate via the Just
Giving link, which is available on the society’s social media channels.
June also saw the DJL holding their first Summer Soiree since their re-launch at the River Mill in Darley Abbey. The event was a roaring success and we have had some excellent feedback from those who attended. May I convey my thanks to Geldards, Stat Building Consultancy, Attenborough Law Limited, Evelyn Partners and the Smith Partnership for being event sponsors. It is very encouraging to see events like this being organised, where the legal and business communities are brought together.
Finally in June, No. 36 Chambers delivered a criminal law update to some of the criminal members within the society on 21st June. My thanks to Mary Prior KC and Paul Prior for delivering their update (after what sounded like a challenging day in the Derby Crown Court) and to Nelsons for hosting once again.
Moving forwards, we now have a date organised for the society’s inaugural “Tapas Thursday” networking event. This event, like the Summer Soiree, is open not only to lawyers but also to other business professionals in Derbyshire. I am very keen in my presidential year to bring the business and legal community together due, in part, to feedback that I have already had from some of the member firms about how we can
add value as a society. The event is booked for 07th September 2023 and we will be releasing details on pricings and how you can book you place shortly. We also have a Ghost Walk provisionally planned for 26th October which the society is organising in conjunction with DJL. Excitingly, Richard Felix will be guiding us around Derby to show us all the spooky sights before we will conclude the evening with some drinks. There are other events and updates planned and we will release further details of them in due course.
Lastly (but by no means by least), I am very proud to announce that the society’s chosen charity for this year is the Enthusiasm Trust based here in Derby. Enthusiasm are an award winning charity that provide high quality, community-focused youth programmes in the most deprived areas in the East Midlands. They provide a safe space and opportunities for young people and their communities to develop life skills to enable social mobility. I am very excited that the society, via its fundraising activities throughout the year, will be able to support Enthusiasm in the vital work that it does.
I look forward to working with you all over the next year.
Oliver Maxwell President, 2023-24A great afternoon in May for those representing DDLS in the Coleman Cup. For the first time in many years the clerics were also represented. Sadly the medics retained the silverware. Well done and thank you to all the lawyers (Russell Davies Jason Skelton Adam Hollis Rod Sinclair Jonathan Taaffe Michael Cockerton David Clark and Graeme Makepeace) medics and clerics who took part. Thank you to Kedleston Park Golf Club for hosting.
criminal practice to specialise in child care at which he excelled. He headed Broadbents’ Childcare Team and appeared regularly in the county courts.
To quote HHJ Orrell, Quentin was “hugely liked and respected”. He was a formidable advocate and highly regarded amongst the local legal community.
Quentin was committed to Derby and District Law Society of which he was a Committee Member for many years. He was Secretary of the Criminal Sub Committee before his retirement from practice due to ill health and was a popular and charismatic President of the Society in 2007/2008.
Quentin was a keen follower of rugby union which he played at Oundle.
In his younger days Quentin was heavily involved with the local Young Farmers Group. He never lost his interest in farming and kept a variety of animals at his parents’ home including sheep, horses and the odd potbellied pig. He was also a member of the Dale Abbey Association for the Prosecution of Felons and a keen participant in the local shoot.
In 2021 Quentin was diagnosed with Motor Neurone Disease and retired from practice. He passed away peacefully on 26 May.
Quentin leaves his wife Karen and an adult son, Tristan, from his first marriage.
Quentin was a fearless advocate for his clients and a highly capable and respected lawyer. To his friends and family however he was just “Quentin”, loyal, incredibly funny, kind, an accomplished raconteur and, quite simply, a character. He was an original and he leaves a massive hole in the lives of all who knew him.
We are deeply saddened to announce the untimely death of Quentin Robbins after a long battle with Motor Neurone Disease.
Quentin was a well-regarded, and will be fondly remembered, local child care and criminal practitioner in Derby, Mansfield and Nottingham.
Quentin was born and grew up in Derby where he was educated at Oundle. He
subsequently attended Cirencester Agricultural College before reading Law at the University of Sheffield between 1983 and 1985. He started his legal career at Robinsons Solicitors qualifying as a solicitor in 1989 before joining Broadbents in 1994 where he subsequently took partnership the following year.
Having qualified as a Higher Court Advocate in 2008 Quentin gradually evolved his
The funeral service will take place at St Bartholomew’s Church, Elvaston on Wednesday 5 July at 12 noon, followed by private interment.
Family flowers only please or, if desired, donations for The Motor Neurone Disease Association may be left at the service or given online at www.wathalls.co.uk
Fiona M K Apthorpelisted at Derby Magistrates Court. Talks are being undertaken to establish whether this is a court or police issues, each are currently blaming the other.
3. This is a concern for those with a Chesterfield Legal Aid contract. There is a demise in the work in that area with the court now only taking new work in on a Monday. The other days are primarily for trials or videolinks (clients on remand)
4. The new IT system in the courts (common platform) is still not fully functioning.
5. A criminal update course was run on 21st June by Mary Prior KC and Paul Prior from No36 crime set. The course was very informative but sadly not very well attended.
6. There are significant court listing issues, in both the Magistrates and Crown court. Crown Court cases are being listed for trial in late Summer 2024. The Magistrates is currently listing in October/ November of this year, but many non-priority cases are being adjourned time and time again.
1. Practitioners will no doubt have seen that there has been a grant of permission for a judicial review into the lack of implementation of the 15% increase in fees that the Lord Bellamy report stated was essential for criminal defence firms. The approximate actual amount firms received is between 7-9%
2. There is an issue in the county about the lack of work being listed at Chesterfield Magistrates Court, this appears not to be a “lack of work “issue, rather the work being
DDLS have enjoyed working with students studying marketing and design at University of Derby who have given us inspiration and ideas for a new logo for DDLS. Here is Nikki Kershaw receiving her prize from new President Oliver Maxwell. Thank you Peter Jordan-Turner for your help.
Excessive charges in financial service claims: The SRA are consulting on draft rules to protect consumers from excessive charges when they are represented by solicitors in claims relating to financial products and services. They would like to hear about a range of perspectives to make sure the rules empower consumers to make informed decisions about the best way to progress their claim and protect them from excessive charges while protecting continued access to legal services in this important area.
The consultation is open for your comments from 31st March 2023 until 19th July 2023.
Further reading - SRA | Protecting consumers from excessive charges in financial service claims |
Solicitors Regulation Authority
New trade deals with Australia and New Zealand: From 31st May, the UK will enter into new free trade agreements with Australia and New Zealand to pave the way for greater market access for professional services, as the
government carves out its post-Brexit trade relationships.
Further reading - New trade deals with Australia and New Zealand can address long-standing barriers | The Law Society
Memorandum of Understanding: On 5th June, TLS, the Bar Council of England and Wales and the Bar Council of India signed a Memorandum of Understanding to strengthen cooperation and legal exchange in light of the opening up of India’s legal services sector to foreign lawyers.
Further reading - Memorandum of Understanding signed | The Law Society
SRA open consultation: The draft Corporate Strategy for 2023-26 describes the SRA’s mission, priorities and key deliverables that will guide and shape their work during the three year period between November 2023 and October 2026. The consultation closes on 2nd August 2023.
Further reading - SRA | Corporate Strategy 2023-26 | Solicitors Regulation Authority
Criminal legal aid decision: TLS has been granted permission to judicially review the
On Wednesday 10th May the annual Legal Skills Triathlon was held at Derby Law School. The triathlon has been running for a number of years now and the feedback from participants year on year is what a positive experience it is, in terms of practicing essential skills and working with students/ professionals alike. Our thanks go to Martin Salt, Oliver Maxell and Di Copestake for giving up their time to judge the competition. Our thanks also go to academics from the Law School, George Ellison, Dr Jennifer Gant, Michala Meiselles and Virna SimoncelliAllan for giving up their time to judge.
The judges commented on the high standards of the participants.
Congratulations to the following winners:
Best team for client interviewing – Aleshia Mahil (student) and Emily Cokayne (trainee solicitor Smith Partnership)
Best team for negotation, Best team for advocacy and Best team overall –Alec Stephens (student) and Darcey Moore (paralegal at Timms).
government’s decision not to implement the 15% increase in criminal legal aid rates for solicitors (as recommended by Lord Bellamy’s independent review on criminal legal aid).
Further reading - Permission granted for court challenge over criminal legal aid decision | The Law Society
Artificial Intelligence (AI) regulation: TLS’s response to the government consultation on its white paper on AI regulation (available on request from TLS) highlighted the important role that the legal profession plays in the advancement of responsible technologies, as well as in implementing standards and regulation.
Further reading - A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
TLS welcomes feedback from you and I would like to hear from you about anything you may wish to share concerning your professional needs. Please contact me at https://www. lawsociety.org.uk/about-us/our-governance/ council-constituencies-and-currentmembers/shama-gupta.
Shama Gupta Law SocietyBest team for advocacy – Alec Stephens and Darcey Moore
Best overall team – Alec Stephens and Darcey Moore
In legal circles the 2022/2023 word in fashion is “SLAPP”. For the very few, unfamiliar with the acronym, it is shorthand for “ Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation” and identifies cases where the primary objective of the, almost always, well heeled, claimant is to harass, intimidate and financially and psychologically exhaust one’s opponent (often an investigative journalist or whistleblower) by improper means . The usual “improper means” is the threat of litigation intended to burden the opponent with excessive costs or potential costs, in resisting the claim. An, entirely hypothetical, illustration, would be where a wealthy prominent Member of Parliament finds that a tax lawyer, suspecting, and investigating, issues between the M.P. and HMRC concerning the M.Ps tax affairs, and instructs a leading Bristol law firm to threaten the lawyer with a libel action if unless he withdraws his claims and ceases his investigations, in circumstances where the M.P knows, or ought to know that the lawyer’s claims canbe justified in law.
The acronym SLAPP was first used in the U.S.A in 1996 but experienced commercial litigators will know that the tactic goes back decades. The late Robert Maxwell, when he became involved in litigation was notorious for going to his lawyers with a cheque for up to £250000 telling them to see off his opponent and if the cheque was not enough in due course, to come back for more when needed.
My own experience happened about 25 years ago. A client came to see me about 7 days before Christmas. The timing was not coincidental. He carried a letter from a large London firm, not a magic circle firm but more the “Crystal Palace of the Premier Legal League” , but large by Derby standards. My client lived part of the year in Marbella and kept a yacht in the Marina. During the summer he hired the yacht out to the public and for this had a trading company called “Easyleisure” , with advertising material and a Website incorporating the domain name of “Easyleisure”. The letter informed him that the lawyers were instructed by EasyJet,
the budget airline at that time still under the ownership of its combative founder Stelios Haji-Ioannou. The letter alleged that my clients company’s use of the word “Easy” in the title “Easyleisure” infringed EasyJet’s intellectual property rights in the word “Easy” and that he must forthwith “cease and desist” using the word “Easyleisure”. Also, within 7 days he must remove the Website and domain name and any other name incorporating the word “Easy” and “yield up” all advertising material etc using the word “Easy” . Unless this was done an “Armageddon of Costs” ( not the expression used, but certainly implied) would fall upon him. If the letter had been more conciliatory my client might have complied without my involvement but the arrogant tone “got his dander up” and he rolled his sleeves up (or rather mine) for a scrap. We replied saying that “Easy” was a word in general use and, without more his client had no property in the word. “EasyJet” we argued had a distinctive orange colouring and font which were not repeated or copied in ”Easyleisure” and my clients were not an airline company (as was, at that time, EasyJet’s sole business). We did not raise two fingers to “Stelios” , but did the lawyerly equivalent by replying that we would “accept due service” of such proceedings as the airline was minded to initiate. The 7 days expired without “due service” . After a little more “lawyerly skirmishing” “Crystal Palace” compromised with what seemed a total capitulation. They purchased from my client the name “Easyleisure” , the domain name and all assets of my client’s company except for the yacht and paid him the sum of £50000, inclusive of (modest) costs. He enjoyed a good many more years in Marbella on the proceeds.
Many firms in the provinces will, on occasion, have received letters from large firms in the City similar to that received from ”Crystal Palace” and usually penned by a “Young Turk” over-endowed with confidence and testosterone. It is worth reminding them that, as every litigation lawyer should know, and every WAG now does know, litigation is a risky business, it can go terribly wrong, bring with it the “unintended consequences” of the public laundering of dirty linen and even victory can be a P.R disaster. The reminder should include the suggestion that the writer read the judgement in McDonalds Corporation v Steel and Morris (1997) EWHC QBD 366 – all 800 pages of it.
Once the “McLibel” case, as it became known in the media, was a part of litigation folklore, the trial said to be the longest in British Legal history, but it may now not be in the memory of “the Young Turks” . In these days of SLAPPs the case deserves recognition. What ultimately became a PR nightmare for the mighty McDonalds began in 1990 when 5 environmental activists began handing out a pamphlet to passersby outside a McDonalds restaurant in London. The pamphlet was highly critical of ethical shortcomings of Macdonald’s business practices. The pamphlet came into possession of McDonald’s senior American management. At the time McDonald’s had a reputation for what was, in effect, SLAPPing any critical publicity, so it would have been no surprise when the company unleashed Barlow, Lyde and Gilbert on the activists. Three of them apologised but two, Helen Steel and David Morris ( a former postman and a gardener), refused. McDonalds sued both.
What followed was a P.R disaster for McDonalds which lasted almost 10 years. Refusal of legal aid meant that Steel and Morris had to defend the action, themselves, which they did with tenacity, garnering public support and donations, and pro bono help from many sympathetic members of the legal profession. The trial alone, at which they represented themselves, lasted 2.5 years, off and on; the transcript was 20000 pages with 40000 pages of documents. As the trial progressed publicity and media interest snowballed. McDonalds tried in vain to settle The court found a number of allegations against McDonalds were libellous and damages were awarded against Steel and Morris (though never paid) but unfortunately for McDonalds the judge also found a number of the defendant’s most serious criticisms of the ethics of McDonald’s business were true. Steel and Morris appealed and though only successful in reducing the damages award, it prolonged the agony and adverse publicity, for McDonalds.
McDonald’s costs of the actions were said to be approximately £10 million. The P.R damage, however, was incalculable. So it was, truly, DAVID 1, GOLIATH 0. And therefore the lesson for the “Young Turks” and other gun-happy MegaFirms -- “SLAPP in Haste and Repent at Leisure”.
John Calladine
Set against the glowing summer sun, this year’s Derby Legal Walk was another great success for the Derby Junior Law Society. The Walk saw Derby-based law firms come together alongside Derby University Law School to raise funds and awareness to increase the access to legal aid. We were also supported by District Judge Davies and Her Honour Judge Williscroft. We are extremely grateful for their support, and for taking part on such a hot day! It yet again demonstrates what the Derby legal community can do when working together.
At present, we have raised just under £1,500.00, all of which will go to the Midlands Legal Trust. The Trust will use the money to help fund legal aid centres, who help to support those who cannot afford the legal aid that they need. Without the hard work of the Trust, the generosity of the donors, and the time of those taking part in the Walk, the Legal Aid system in Derby would suffer greatly, and limit access to legal advice even further.
The Walk itself was a chance for the legal sector to connect through a good cause. We welcomed Rotheras Solicitors into the Derby community. it was great to see a strong turn-out from one of the new firms in the area who are keen to get involved with the Law Society. In addition, we would like to thank Smith Partnership for supplying the walkers with water and snacks, and to Derby University for allowing us to use their facilities at the beginning of the Walk.
After the Walk, the DJL provided a free drink for all walkers at the Orange Tree on George Street. Even though it was getting late, the Orange Tree was very well attended, and was a chance for the great atmosphere during the Walk to carry on further into the evening.
The Legal Walk really was a lovely evening, and once again, the Derby Junior Lawyers would like to thank everyone who attended, donated, or supported the event in any way.
Watch out for the next DJL event!
John Ellis Derby Junior Law Society Vice President
Lecturer salary from £35,505
Senior Lecturer Salary from £41,131 The level of appointment would be determined by the selection panel following an interview.
We are looking to appoint four Lecturers or Senior Lecturers (depending on experience) to teach on our undergraduate and/or postgraduate (including practitioner) courses. We welcome applications from candidates who specialise in one or more of the following subject areas: Commercial Law, Business Law, Intellectual Property Law, Employment Law, Criminal Law or Sports Law.
Professional qualification as a solicitor or barrister or as a chartered legal executive (FCILEX) or a trade mark attorney or a patent attorney in the jurisdiction of England and Wales and/or an undergraduate degree, preferably in Law and Ph.D. (or expected submission of thesis in advance of 1st September 2023).
Interview Date: Week commencing 3rd July 2023.
If you have specific queries in relation to these roles, please contact Dr Alex Kastrinou (alexandra.kastrinou@ntu.ac.uk), Head of Postgraduate Portfolio or Dr Elyse Wakelin (elyse.wakelin02@ntu.ac.uk), Head of Undergraduate Portfolio.
If you are in the early stages of an academic career and are considering joining NTU, then our Early Career Academic Development Programme could be just right for you.
If you are considering joining NTU as a Senior Lecturer you will benefit from our Senior Lecturer Career Framework, which recognises and rewards you based on your performance, contribution and achievement, and offers the opportunity of faster salary progression compared to the industry average.
We are deeply proud of our academic
community. Nottingham Trent University (NTU) is a diverse and dynamic learning environment, defined by a shared sense of respect for all its people. Our mission is to be bold, to do the right things and to change lives, and our academics are key to realising those goals. Their work continues to reinforce our credentials as an award-winning university, and a research centre of excellence.
Our continued success — underpinned by the number of prestigious national awards we’ve won — has hinged on two commitments: forging excellent partnerships around the world and harnessing the talents of all our people. We secured a ‘Gold’ rating in the government’s Teaching Excellence Framework; received the Queen’s Anniversary Prize for our pioneering research; and in 2018, we were the first UK university to sign the Social Mobility Pledge, further demonstrating our commitment to ensuring ‘success for all’. NTU is a university at the peak of its powers, but we know we can still go even further. That’s why we’re now looking for new, passionate, ambitious people to join our community.
Nottingham Law School is one of the leading providers of academic and professional legal education in the country with an established record of delivering innovative and transformational courses. We are one of the largest law schools in the UK, offering a range of undergraduate degrees, academic and practitioner taught postgraduate courses and a strong research degrees programme. The School has over 100 academic staff and in excess of 2,500 students of whom over 500 are students studying on postgraduate or practitioner courses.
The School has built a reputation for excellence in the provision of legal education and in shaping the careers of solicitors, barristers and legal practitioners at both a national and international level.
In addition to our research expertise, we have long established links with policy makers, professional bodies and leading law firms,
including a growing number of significant international associations. We have an extensive record of delivery of excellent bespoke training programmes for practitioners and professional bodies and have strengths in commissioned research, both in the UK and overseas.
Find out more about our academic community at NTU, including the support we offer to academics at all stages of their careers at Support for academics | Nottingham Trent University.
We also offer:Between 25 and 35 days annual leave per year (dependent on grade) plus statutory bank holidays and 5 university closure days pro rata
• Generous pension scheme with life assurance. We contribute 23.68% of your salary.
• Opportunity to receive a bonus for exceptional performance and contribution
• Range of health and wellbeing services, voluntary benefits, discounts, and savings for all colleagues.
• And a whole lot more…
• Come and be part of our success. Apply today.
• NTU prides itself on being an inclusive employer. We value and celebrate equality in opportunities, and we welcome applications from people who reflect the diversity of our communities.
This role is open to non-UK/Irish applicants subject to current UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) rules. Please ensure that you have the appropriate right to work in the UK for this role and consult the Home Office website for further information.
We’re proud of how far we’ve come. With a shared vision, we are a community of more than 4,000 colleagues, all committed to our goal of becoming ‘the university of the future’. Do you have the passion to help us to go even further?
In the modern world, where technology has become an integral part of our lives, the legal sector has not been left behind and is rapidly adopting digital technology to enhance operations, from managing client information to filing court documents. This digital transformation has brought numerous benefits, such as increased efficiency and productivity, but it has also exposed the legal sector to significant cybersecurity risks.
Cybersecurity refers to the practice of protecting computer systems and networks from unauthorised access, theft, damage, and other forms of cyber-attacks. The legal sector is particularly vulnerable because it deals with a vast amount of sensitive and confidential information – such as client identities, intellectual property, financial records, and other sensitive data – which is highly valuable to hackers, who can use it for identity theft, financial fraud, or other malicious activities.
The consequences of a successful cyberattack on a law firm or legal entity can be devastating. The firm may lose its reputation, face legal liabilities, and incur significant financial losses. Furthermore, a cyberattack on a law firm can compromise the confidentiality of client information, leading to a loss of trust, which can be difficult to regain.
To mitigate these risks, it is essential for legal firms to adopt a proactive approach and prioritise their cybersecurity by implementing robust measures to protect computer systems and networks from cyber threats. These measures may include firewalls, intrusion detection and prevention systems, encryption, and multi-factor authentication.
In addition to technological solutions, cybersecurity also involves promoting a culture
of awareness and vigilance among employees. This includes training employees to recognise and respond to potential cyber threats, such as phishing emails, and implementing best practices for password management and data protection.
As an IT managed service provider (MSP), we strive to deliver strategic and transformative IT for our clients, providing a security-focused, flexible approach. We’re driven by our desire to do the right thing and keep it simple; just like we set out to do in 2017. With pride in our work and valued integrity, we take responsibility when issues arise to ensure quick solutions. As well as providing daily IT support and protection for your business, True MSP provides a wealth of all-encompassing professional IT services, such as communications, connectivity, business continuity solutions and project consultancy.
As the preferred IT partner for local legal firms, we offer the following as standard to all our clients.
• A comprehensive cybersecurity audit to assess your exposure and security posture.
• Develop a bespoke policy that outlines your firm’s approach to cyber security.
• Implement strong passwords and twofactor authentication security controls to limit access to data and ensure that only authorised personnel can access sensitive information.
• Use encryption to protect sensitive data both in transit and at rest. This will prevent unauthorised access to data in the event of a breach.
• Keep software up to date with the latest security patches and updates.
• Implement firewalls and intrusion detection systems to prevent unauthorised access and to detect and respond to potential threats.
• Backup data regularly to an offsite location to ensure that it can be restored in the event of a breach.
• Provide employee training on cyber security best practices, including how to identify and respond to potential threats.
• Monitor network activity for any unusual or suspicious behaviour. This can help identify potential threats before they become serious.
• Conduct regular risk assessments to find potential vulnerabilities and ensure that cyber security measures are in place to mitigate them.
• Develop a response plan in the event of a cyber-attack. This should include steps to contain the attack, notify stakeholders, and restore systems and data.
True MSP are proud to work with many leading firms in the East Midlands area. To demonstrate our dedication to Cyber Security and protecting local businesses, we’re offering a complimentary full Cybersecurity audit to the first 20 Law firms who contact us and mention this D&DLS article.
Additionally, if you feel your firm could benefit from any of the IT services that True MSP provide, please get in touch for a free consultation.
On Friday 02 June 2023, the Derby Junior Law Society held their first ever Summer Soiree at the River Mill, Darley Abbey. The event was a great success and very well-attended.
The Soiree presented a perfect environment for professionals from a range of disciplines across Derbyshire and beyond
wonderful live entertainment.
The event was sponsored by LEAP, Geldards, Evelyn Partners, Stat BC, Attenborough Law Ltd, Our Family Wizard, and Smith Partnership – a huge thank you to all of you. Your financial support was crucial in helping to make the evening the success that it was.
to network in an informal setting. It was pleasure to see familiar faces from local legal firms, and to initiate new connections and commercial opportunities with other professionals in non-legal sectors. DJL wish to express sincere gratitude to all of those that attended the event. The venue, by the River Derwent, was the perfect setting to strengthen existing relationships and forge new ones over some delicious food and
A warm thanks to our senior Society, the Derby & District Law Society, who have guided DJL throughout the year. In particular, we would like to thank Tina Attenborough, Julia Saunders and Manesha Ruparel and for their time and tips for all the events organised this year. We were also delighted by the charity shown by our guests during our raffle. The money raised by their generous donations will be donated to the YMCA Derbyshire, who are a local charity, aiming to help young people through offering support, advice, housing, education, and health programmes. We are proud to confirm that the sum raised was £300.00, which is a fantastic result!
From a personal perspective, planning and executing this event has been one of the biggest challenges that both the DJL Committee, and myself, have faced in our time together. The teamwork and support from all members of the DJL Committee was paramount in ensuring that we were in a financial position to run the event, and that the evening itself ran as smoothly as it did. I am personally delighted at the feedback that the DJL have received since the event, and I am very excited about how we can improve and build on
the success of this event as we progress through the year.
Once again, thank you to everyone that has supported the DJL through the past year, your support is greatly appreciated. Should anyone have any questions or wish to get involved with the Society going forward, please do get in touch with myself, or any other member of the DJL Committee.
We are super excited about the future of the Society, we have a number of events in the pipeline – watch this space!
John Ellis Trainee Solicitor ALEXANDER & CO SOLICITORS LLP
Remember a Charity week is getting nearer, this year being held from 11th-17th September. Its aim is to prompt everyone to take time out to consider leaving a gift in their will to a charity after they have left sufficient amounts to take care of friends and family.
Last September’s event saw the launch of Remember a Charity’s ad campaign with a number of charities sharing their “Will You?” materials.
The event was brought to an early close with the announcement of the late Queen’s passing on 8th September, but the adverts
had already reached over a million people and over 750,000 people watched the video campaigns. Over 60 Solicitors and will writers also applied to join the 800 plus on the campaign supporters scheme at that time.
The campaign aims to give clients the best possible advice when making their will. Only 6.3% currently leave a charitable legacy, despite 74% of the British public supporting a charity during their lifetime.
Let’s hope that this year can see more solicitors sign up for the scheme and make legacy giving a social norm.
• Legacy giving reaching £136m in 2020/21 in Scotland**
• Legacies account for one 5th of all money donated to Scottish charities**
• Almost 50% of all Scottish charities’ legacy income goes to Scotland’s top 50 charities – a total of £66m in 2020/21 - 2.8% higher than the previous year***
A new report out today (Wednesday 21 June) highlights the growth and breadth of the Scottish legacy market for charities and underlines the importance of investing long-term in this fundraising stream.
The Scottish Legacy Market Report 2023* was produced by Remember A Charity, a consortium of UK charities working to promote charitable gifts in Wills amongst the British public, and Legacy Foresight, the UK’s legacy and in-memory sector specialist analysis firm. The report brings together key statistics on the Scottish legacy market, as well as insights and recommendations from legacy experts at charities, such as CHAS, Worldwide Cancer Research, Children in Scotland, Cancer Support Scotland and SCOTLAND: The Big Picture, to help those at the start of their legacy fundraising journey.
The report shows:
the connection supporters feel to good causes continues to grow along with a rising interest in legacy giving.
42% of Scots aged 40 and above say they would be happy to give in this way and 21% have already done so****.
Legacy giving to Scottish charities is showing a year-on-year rise, with the latest data from SCVO showing that it reached £136m in 2020/2021**.
Legacy income accounts for one fifth of all money donated to Scottish charities annually**.
Almost half of all Scottish charities’ legacy income goes to Scotland’s top 50 charities, who received £66m in 2020/21, with the biggest share going to health causes****.
Some 500 Scottish charities of all sizes are named in Wills each year*****.
Lucinda Frostick, Director at Remember A Charity, says: “In the costof-living crisis, money is tight for charities and supporters alike. But in many ways, this brings us all closer together, with people being acutely aware of the need for charitable services and wanting to support the causes they care about. As legacy giving has little or no upfront cost while offering the potential to achieve a better future, we’re seeing appetite for giving in this way reach record levels. Legacies offer a huge growth opportunity for Scottish charities.”
Kath Horsley, Director of Insight at Legacy Foresight added: “The fundraising market is becoming increasingly challenging and competitive but for those charities who continue to invest in legacy fundraising it remains resilient and we continue to see legacy income on an upward trajectory. Whilst the Scottish market is relatively small, it is clear that Scotland is on a similar trend to that of the UK as a whole, and the forecast for charity legacies remains promising.”
Mark Docherty, Legacy Manager at Worldwide Cancer Research, added: “Legacy income is really crucial for us, accounting for about 20 per cent of our income and the majority is unrestricted. Whilst some other income sources have gone down over recent years, legacies have remained resilient, boosted by the housing market. Legacy fundraising is such a good investment that it’s critical to keep going – working in today’s storm will enable us to take care of those that follow.”
Gifts in Wills are the largest single source of voluntary income for charities in the UK, raising almost £3.9 billion** for good causes annually and funding vital charitable services. Whilst Scotland’s legacy market is younger than that of England and Wales, it is seeing considerable longterm growth, with hundreds of charities of all sizes now being named in Wills each year, funding vital services across Scotland.
The Scottish Legacy Market Report 2023 includes data, insights and top tips for charities embarking on legacy fundraising and is available to download from rememberacharity.org.uk and legacyforesight.co.uk at
https://www.rememberacharity.org.uk/ media/uo2duoee/rac_scottish-legacymarket-report-2023_aw_digital.pdf
At Derbyshire Wildlife Trust, our plans for leading nature’s recovery, inspiring people and communities to care, and mobilising people to act are far reaching. To be sure we can see them through, we need to know we will receive income in the future.
Leaving a gift in a will to the Derbyshire Wildlife Trust is one way our members and supporters can help make sure we can plan far ahead and achieve our vision of landscapes rich in wildlife, valued by everyone.
Thinking about making a will is something that lots of people put off, for all sorts of reasons, but when leaving a gift to Derbyshire Wildlife Trust people can be confident that their legacy, big or small, will make a real difference and will be put to good use meeting the most urgent conservation needs.
We understand that solicitors have a key
role in making their clients aware of all the options when writing a Will, including the concept of giving to charities like our own. We really value this support and couldn’t do what we do without organisations like yours mentioning legacy giving as part of the Will-writing process – you make all the difference.
Here Stephanie Bentley and Vicky Cross share the story of Sheila Bently and her lifelong interest in nature:
Our mother Sheila Bentley, who died in April aged 84, left a legacy of £1,000 to the Derbyshire Wildlife Trust in her will. She was very clear that she wanted to help the good work of the DWT, having been a member of the Trust for nearly 60 years.
Sheila had a lifelong interest in nature and especially in wild flowers and botany, which she had studied at school. She and our late father Roy Bentley were among the original
members of the DWT when it first started in 1962, not long after they moved from London to set up home in Duffield.
They both loved the Derbyshire countryside, with Roy particularly interested in birdwatching, geology and the history of the landscape. Some years after Roy died, Sheila was very pleased and touched to be invited to an evening at the DWT’s headquarters in Middleton to commemorate the founding of the Trust.
For much of her retirement, Sheila was a keen rambler in Derbyshire. In later years she enjoyed family outings with her grandchildren to beautiful places such as Cromford Canal, where we spotted the little grebes amongst the moorhens and ducks.
Our mum left a legacy to the DWT because she wanted to help preserve Derbyshire’s wildlife beyond her lifetime. She wanted future generations to be able to enjoy precious nature just as she and Roy had done.
of the expert’s opinion, are disclosed to the other parties and such condition will usually be imposed: Beck v Ministry of Defence [2003] EWCA Civ 1043 per Simon Brown LJ at [24][26]; Vasiliou v Hajigeorgiou [2005] EWCA Civ 236 per Dyson LJ at [29]-[30].
given access to the documents.
• In the interest of fairness and transparency, one of the defendant’s had not been involved in the dispute in the early stages and therefore their expert did not participate in early investigations.
A recent application to the High Court to replace two experts with one new expert has been considered by Mrs Justice O’Farrell DBE and provides useful insight to legal teams regarding when permission to change an expert witness will be granted and the documentation ordered to be disclosed.
The case relates to a fire at a retirement village in 2019 which almost destroyed the entire property, and the claimants seeking damages of over £40m in respect of alleged deficiencies in design and the construction of the property.
In this application, the claimants sought to replace two experts; one a Forensic Scientist, the other a Fire Engineer.
In the judgment, Mrs Justice O’Farrell provides a useful summary of the relevant principles and discretionary powers the court has as was considered in the case of The University of Manchester v John McAslan & Partner and others [2022] EWHC 2750 (TCC):
i) The court has a general discretion to permit a party to change the identity of the expert on which it relies, pursuant to its specific power to control the use of expert evidence under CPR 35.4 or as part of its general case management powers under CPR 3.1(2).
ii) Such general discretion should be exercised having regard to all the material circumstances of the case and in accordance with the overriding objective.
iii) The usual rule is that the court should not refuse a party permission to rely on a new expert in substitution for an existing expert: EdwardsTubb v JD Wetherspoon plc [2011] EWCA Civ 136 per Hughes LJ at [30]; Murray v Devenish [2017] EWCA Civ 1016 per Gross LJ at [15]-[16].
iv) Where a party requires the court’s permission to rely on a new expert in substitution for an existing expert, the court has the power to give permission on condition that the original expert’s reports, containing the substance
v) The justification for imposing a condition that the original expert’s reports should be disclosed includes (a) prevention of expert shopping and (b) ensuring that the expert’s contribution is available to the court and all parties, regardless of the instructing party: Vasiliou (above) at [29]; Edwards-Tubb (above) at [30].
vi) The court’s power to impose a condition on the grant of permission to change an expert may extend to other documents containing the substance of the original expert’s opinion but the court must be cautious about encroaching upon areas of privilege and consider carefully the potential value of such other documents; in particular, there must be a strong case to justify disclosure of solicitors’ attendance notes: BMG (Mansfield) Ltd v Galliford Try Construction Ltd [2013] EWHC 3183 (TCC) per EdwardsStuart J at [28]-[32]
The application to change the Forensic Scientist had not been opposed in principle by the Defendants. The Expert Witness has a serious illness which requires treatment and prevents her from continuing to participate in the proceedings. However, their position was that her earlier reports, opinions and investigation notes be disclosed.
Considering submissions from each side that on the basis that this was clearly not a case of expert shopping and a case of necessity due to the expert’s illness, there would usually be no reason to disclose all reports or other documents setting out her opinion.
However, because the Expert had played such a significant part in the litigation; leading an investigation at the property before it was demolished, interviewing a resident, and providing substantial input into the statements of the case, Mrs Justice O’Farrell stated that the court would order the disclosure of all reports and notes.
The reasons for this are:
• The expert’s documentation contained evidence of primary facts that would now be unavailable through any future inspection due to demolition of the property.
• If she had continued to act in the case, it is likely she would have referred to the documents and there would have therefore been a requirement to disclose them anyway.
• It is likely the replacement expert will be
• Notes of the interview with the resident may include relevant information that would not have been included in their witness statement.
The grounds for changing the Fire Engineer were less clear and the defendants opposed the application because the expert to be replaced is qualified and available to give expert evidence at trial.
The reasons put forward by the Claimants across two witness statements include:
• The expert had relied on a colleague to carry out analysis with respect to sprinkler capability but was not a fire engineer. However, the Forensic Scientist had been able to cover this. And as this expert was being replaced, they wished to change the Fire Engineer.
• The considerable overlap of evidence from the Forensic Expert and the Fire Engineer.
• Concern that there was a conflict of interest from the Fire Engineer.
• The claimants do not have confidence in the Fire Engineer.
• The claimants accept that the three reports prepared by their Fire Engineer would be disclosed.
Whilst noting the legitimate concerns from the defendants, Mrs Justice O’Farrell granted the application to change the Expert Witness stating that:
“It is in the interests of justice that the claimants should have permission to rely on an expert in whom they have confidence.”
She ordered that the expert’s reports, draft reports, and any further documents in which the expert had expressed an opinion to be disclosed.
Learning points:
1. If the grounds for changing your expert are clear cut (such as illness) the court may still order the disclosure of documents if they contain information or evidence of primary facts that should be made available to all.
2. The court will accept lack of confidence in the expert as grounds for a change, but you will need to be clear of the reasons and be aware that all opinion provided by that expert will be disclosed.
3. If you are seeking to change your expert, provide as much clarity as possible regarding the reasons for the change.
I want to talk today about a particularly difficult problem which mediators are asked to address, namely disputes over family inheritance. The reason they are so difficult is that it’s seldom about the money, or at least about money alone. Underlying many of these disputes are long-held resentments, questions of selfworth, fairness, and questions of the degree of love felt by the deceased. And so often the deceased’s love for their siblings can only be measured – in the perception of their offspring – by the size of their legacies.
The deceased widow was moderately wealthy, leaving two adult siblings, a boy and a girl. Both thought they were equally loved by their mother. The boy had developed a very successful career and was financially comfortable; the girl had stayed at home to look after mother during her long final illness, and was in need of financial support. So when the will was read, the fairly rich boy was left just a few mementos; the girl was left the rest of the sizeable estate.
Why the imbalance? No doubt because mother thought her girl needed the money and deserved a reward for all the care given. But the boy was offended because he thought this showed that Mum didn’t love him as much as his sister, and he suspected that she had put their mother under undue influence to write her will in that way. And then all the old resentments came out: Mum had always loved the girl more than the boy; she got more presents at Christmas, and so on. The girl thought it unfair that the boy was allowed to go to university (and even take an MBA in America) when she was already stuck at home looking after Mum.
Well, this is hypothetical, so I can’t tell you the outcome of the mediation, but you can I’m sure appreciate the challenge. And I have seen these imbalances in several cases. For example, in a farming case one brother worked on the farm for many years on a modest wage, with an understanding he would inherit the farm. The other brother worked abroad, and did very well with his own business. On father’s death, the estate was left to the two sons in equal shares, no doubt to demonstrate his equal love for them. But that left the farming brother with a problem; he had to raise the finance to buy out his wealthy brother’s share of the farm. You see, even doing the right thing can cause friction.
The grandfather clock
This is one of my early mediations. Please forgive me if you’ve heard it before, but it is worth repeating.
Brother and sister hated each other with a passion, for good reason. Sister had left home at 18 to get married and had virtually never returned home to see how Mum was doing. Brother was stuck at home looking after Mum and working locally as a motor mechanic. He was Mum’s carer, and was resentful that he couldn’t go out with the lads to the pub, get a girlfriend, have a normal life.
When Mum died he went off the rails, went to Thailand and did all the Gary Glitter things: excessive tattoos, drugs, under-age sex. He was resentful
at missing a normal lad’s life and his sister despised him for his Thailand activities.
When he came home the passions flared up. He found that his sister had sold Mum’s house (his home) and put all the house contents in storage. So he had lost his home, and she was having to pay storage charges. Not good.
I spent a lot of time in caucus with the two of them, allowing the bile to spill out. The solution was obviously to get the furniture out of storage, so eventually I asked sister if there was anything there which she would like to keep, to remind her of Mum. “Nothing”, she said emphatically. Then I asked brother, and he said he would like to keep the family grandfather clock, which he had wound every night after making Mum’s supper. Sister said he could have it.
This was mediation gold dust; we had found something which one party wanted, and which would cost the other party nothing to give. After that the siblings agreed that all the other contents could be sold or given to charity, and in no time we had full agreement to how Mum’s money should be divided. Magic!
The deceased, a wealthy property developer, was rather fond of the ladies. He had been married four times, not counting the other female friends.
There were no children involved here, but it was complicated enough.
The problem was that the deceased had written a codicil in favour of his fourth wife, a go-getter whom he married just before going into hospital where he died. The second wife was still in love with the deceased; they had been in partnership as property developers and she had still not agreed a final shareout of the properties. But they had agreed that she could take the family mansion, a very valuable property on the Hamble. And because the property would give her more than a half share of their stock, she had to give the deceased a charge over it. Now, she had no dependents and could not afford to live there, but there was substantial equity. So an equity release scheme was ideal, but the charge permitted no later charges.
Both ladies were stuck; wife two couldn’t afford to release her equity and wife four couldn’t wind up the estate and enjoy her inheritance because of the challenge to the codicil.
I spent a considerable time with wife two, who was very old and frail, and eventually a solution was reached: wife four would remove the inferior charge requirement, wife two would get her equity release, and wife two would pay to wife four a discounted figure against the charge.
The moral
I often say that in mediation, the parties need a mediator who is more a social worker than a high-powered lawyer or specialist in the subject. The key need is for empathy; the mediator must be a warm
human being who gains the trust of the parties, and who takes the trouble to listen to their true needs. That way, a position which the parties can live with may be found.
But with family inheritance disputes, those qualities in the mediator must be there in spades!
Biog : Chris Makin has practised as a forensic accountant and expert witness for 30 years, latterly as Head of Litigation Support at a national firm. He has given expert evidence about 100 times. He also performs expert determinations.
Chris is a fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants where he has served on the Forensic Committee, and as an ethical counsellor; he is a fellow of the Chartered Management Institute, a fellow of the Academy of Experts where he serves on the Investigations Committee, and a mediator accredited by the Chartered Arbitrators.
He practises as a mediator, from his home in West Yorkshire and his rooms at 3 Gray’s Inn Square, London WC1R 5AH, telephone 020 7430 0333 . He has mediated 100+ cases so far, on a huge range of subjects, with a settlement rate to date of 80%. For more see his website with videos:
www.chrismakin.co.uk chris@chrismakin.co.uk
As we rapidly approach the summer and the halfway point in the 2023 calendar year, I am pleased to advise that there is cause for optimism amongst well-run firms with regards to PII market conditions as we look ahead to the October renewal season.
The vast majority of leading participating insurers have an appetite to actively grow their respective portfolios with the addition of new business. Furthermore, new capacity is set to enter the marketplace before October, meaning firms with a desirable profile are going to have even more insurer options available to them at this year’s renewal.
If we reflect briefly on what happened in the now well-populated recent spring renewal season, although a proportion of insurers did wish to increase rates – albeit more modestly than they have in recent seasons – the majority of insurers’ rates plateaued. This is a reflection of the positive dynamics within the PII marketplace, with more active competition for business. Extended policy periods also returned to availability, albeit in limited number. Nonetheless, this signals a sea change to recent years.
The one slight frustration of the spring renewal season was premium financing, with costs of borrowing increasing throughout the period, largely as a result of macroeconomic factors. Finance providers were also strengthening their due diligence processes, adversely impacting the speed of decision-making and processing of loans. We anticipate that the due diligence process will become even more stringent as we move into the October renewal.
With the likelihood of the emergence of new insurer capacity on the immediate horizon, coupled with an increased appetite among insurers already active in the market, wellrun practices can expect a softening in the rates charged come October. What is not yet known, is how diluted rates will become. We also expect extended policy periods to become more readily available, with insurers once again offering the choice of up to 18 months for a portion of their portfolios.
Without wishing to dampen the positive tone
of this update, the one caveat to give is that the dilution of rates doesn’t necessarily mean that there’s set to be a dramatic reduction of premiums. For many firms, rising inflation has fuelled an increase in fee income, which will naturally have an impact on the premiums charged by insurers. It does mean, however, that for well-run and successful practices, the cost of PII premiums should not erode profit margins further, as it may well have done at recent renewal periods.
It will be of no surprise that the softening of rates may not positively impact the entire legal profession of England and Wales. This is particularly true of practices that have experienced an adverse claims position, and those that are heavily involved in perceived higher-risk practice areas. Practices should not be complacent, and cannot expect premiums to fall without any effort on their part. I cannot stress the importance in providing your chosen representative(s) with the appropriate evidence to share with the underwriters, in order to justify applying positive price corrections.
To capitalise on the improving insurance market conditions, our recommendation to you would be to commence the renewal process early. Most importantly, take the time to prepare a quality presentation that provides a positive reflection of your practice. As Lockton have advised countless times, this is your shop window for insurers, so use the opportunity wisely. It is prudent to remember that approximately two-thirds of the legal profession of England and Wales renew at the end of September, so you will be vying for the attention of the underwriting teams along with a substantial number of your peers.
Whilst insurers have an increased appetite for business, their underwriting teams will only have a finite amount of time to undertake their risk assessments. With that in mind, make sure your practice stands out from the crowd. Should you have experienced claims, provide a narrative of the situation, along with detail of what measures you have implemented to prevent their repeat. Simply stating that the fee earner responsible for the claims is no longer with your firm, is not necessarily what insurers are looking for.
I encourage you to use this opportunity to help your chosen representative(s) to
educate insurers about your firm, what you do, and how you do it. Consider the fact that specialist underwriters are not solicitors, and although they will understand risk and the ramifications of any mistakes, they may not understand the intricacies of your specialism entirely. At the same time, no two practices are identical, so articulate why you are better. As they say, perception is not always the reality – an underwriter could always form an opinion which is incorrect. And once opinions are formed, they are much harder to change.
In terms of timescales, we recommend providing the presentation at least six, but preferably eight weeks in advance of your renewal date. Begin exploring finance options much earlier in the process than you have done so previously, given that the process is longer, and you may need to shop around to get the most favourable terms.
Choose your representative(s) wisely, acknowledging the fact that it would not be advantageous to scatter your presentation across the marketplace, as this may dilute the work that you have done to present your practice in a positive light. There is a possibility that your representative may not be able to reach all of the active participating insurers directly, and this may well result in you not being able to achieve the optimum solution possible for your practice. Before selecting your representative(s), establish which insurers that they can approach directly on your behalf. You will not truly benefit from an improving PII landscape should you inadvertently exclude half of the active participating insurers.
We would welcome an opportunity to canvass the market for all members of Derby and District Law Society, or provide a second opinion. We have direct access to more active participating insurers than any of our peers, and will have insurer solutions that your current representatives cannot provide for you.
I do hope that you take up this offer, and wish you all the best.
Brian Boehmer Partner E: brian.boehmer@lockton.com W: www.locktonsolicitors.co.uk
