This website uses cookies

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website, you agree to our Privacy Policy

Jean-Yves Gilg

Jean-Yves Gilg

Editor, Solicitors Journal

Articles

Doing it for the kids

Doing it for the kids

In child care cases, it is important to seek independent experts with well-recognised specialisms and ensure they are instructed early on in proceedings, says Kay Marriott
Update: construction

Update: construction

Mark Hessel considers 'right to light' case law and how a turbulent economy, coupled with reduced commercial property revenues, will translate in construction disputes, particularly in terms of compensation
Update: crime

Update: crime

Ian Harris and Christopher Gutteridge discuss the latest cases, including the problems with accepting cautions too readily, relying on hearsay evidence, the tougher approach to sentencing burglars, and the new dangerousness provisions
Getting a full discount

Getting a full discount

Criminal courts are no longer able to refuse full credit for time spent on remand in custody unless the judge regards it 'just' to decide otherwise, but is this fair when the defendant could escape prison altogether, asks Philip Rule
All roads lead to Rome

All roads lead to Rome

Firms are still seeing a healthy stream of travel and holiday claims, but recent cases and new legislation of have created further uncertainty. Jenny Ramage reports
Irregular awards

Irregular awards

Landlords and tenants feeling the pressure in the economic downturn are more likely to appeal against rent review arbitration awards but the courts have set high hurdles to such challenges, warns Stephen Bickford-Smith
Rage against the machine

Rage against the machine

The possibility for aggrieved customers to bring harassment claims against large corporations should encourage companies to take responsibility for their actions and stop sending threatening automated correspondence says Tom Collins
A people's court

A people's court

The new tribunals system is intended to put appellants and respondents on an equal footing but its formality could be more intimidating for all, says Keith Wilding