you are here:

All News Articles

If we have heard it once then we have heard it 1000 times: we cannot recover our money because the directors of the company have placed it into liquidation. In this day and age this is a regular occurrence and can place creditor companies under extreme pressure, simply because money that they were relying on will now never arrive therefore squeezing their cash flow.

In a world where we love tags and buzz words – ‘Revenge Porn’ is one of the newest ones.

Allegations of defamation can be very difficult to prove. Matters turn largely on evidential issues, and often require the Court to determine matters of fact, which can only be done at trial. However, in certain cases, an uber-aggressive application can be made to strike the case out, often on procedural grounds, as prescribed under the Civil Procedure Rules. If a case cannot show the Court bonafide grounds of success because it has been pleaded badly or defectively, then it is fair game to a strike out application. This is exactly what happened in the case of Reynolds v Bovey.

“The cost of worldwide litigation is completely out of control” – the words of Mr Justice Colman following a one day maintenance hearing last week, costing £55,000!

The recent case of Josh Grant highlights that even in the most emotional of circumstances software providers, such as Apple are unwilling to release sensitive user data in the absence of a Court Order.

How Not To Litigate

Some of you may have read about the long running saga that was widely reported in the press: Young vs Young.

For an adult film star, your image and your brand are everything. The manner in which you act is unique and therefore subject to copyright protection. This is particularly apparent to girls working on ‘call in shows’. Your copyright is exclusive TO YOU: it belongs TO YOU, and you make money out of it. Money is received by you from the company that you contract with, often the same company that operates and manages the ‘call in shows’.

On 27th February, the Law Commission published a report about Matrimonial Property, Needs and Arrangements and immediately thereafter there was a mass of reports in the media celebrating what they were heralding as being the validation of pre-nuptial agreements. Slightly premature in my opinion.

Now that things have calmed down a little and we have all had time to digest the report, I can finally tell you what the real position is.

Australian man is ordered to pay $105,000.00 following the publication of online defamation on Twitter and Facebook.

Pages

Latest articles

  • 13.04.2018

    Sir Cliff Richard v South Yorkshire Police...

    Sir Cliff Richard v South Yorkshire Police...read more

  • 10.01.2018

    Is it wise to delay a financial settlement?

    The financial settlement is the final...read more

View all news >
Follow >