Diary news plus insights, commentary and appointments from the legal world

15 August 2025

Editorial contact: fennell.edward@yahoo.com

SHORT THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK: Poles Apart Legally?

The imminent tête-a-tete between Trump and Putin signals a monumental moment in the nightmare that is Ukraine’s self-defence against a trigger happy neighbour. By the time you read this it may be all over bar the bombing.

But if – as seems likely – Trump makes no mention of the illegality of Putin’s aggression (or the many other actions by his troops subsequently) then another key causality of the encounter will be the idea and status of international law and a rules-based system.

A Russian spokesperson on the BBC news this morning declared that what had been taking place over the past three years had been a ‘civil war between Russians’. In other words it should be of no concern to ‘outsiders’.

This flies in the face of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership agreed jointly in 1997 by Ukraine and Russia and which recognized Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty and existing borders. If that means nothing to these talks then we are all in trouble.

The LegalDiarist

In this edition

+ LEGAL DIARY OF THE WEEK

Phishing Trips Target Immigration System

HAL Takes A Legal Hit

SOLLA Gains Youthful Energy

Edwin Coe Commits to Family tree

+ CONTRIBUTED ARTICLES OF THE WEEK

Advancing technology and delays in the court system

by Jennifer Richardson

Parental child abduction over the summer holidays? Prevention is key

says Simran Gupta

+ LEGAL COMMENT OF THE WEEK

Ukraine peace negotiations, the ‘unfair dismissal’ of a Barclays financial advisor, the CMS 2025 Class Action Report, repossessions by county court bailiffs following a section 21 notice, Natural England’s Species Recovery Programme

+ APPOINTMENTS OF THE WEEK

at Osbornes Law

LEGAL DIARY OF THE WEEK

Phishing Trips Target Immigration System

A rise in phishing scams is proving a headache for the country’s immigration system since fraudsters started impersonating official Home Office communications in order to steal login credentials for the Sponsorship Management System ( a secure portal which is used by approved organisations to manage visa sponsorships).

According to Mimecast’s Threat Research team, the fraudulent emails carry urgent compliance warnings or account suspension threats and contain links to highly convincing fake SMS login pages. The ‘threat actors’ showed that they had advanced understanding of government communication patterns and user expectations within the UK immigration system, explains Mimecast.

“We are aware of sponsors who have been targeted by these phishing scams and an unfortunate few who have had their systems breached,” explained Natasha Chell, Partner and Head of Risk and Compliance at Laura Devine Immigration. “As gatekeepers of the sponsorship system, sponsors need to protect their Home Office online accounts by having robust IT practices, regular training for Key Personnel who have access to the accounts and they should always contact the official Home Office channels to verify any suspicious requests.”

After the credentials have been stolen, they are used to issue fraudulent Certificates of Sponsorship. It is these which then facilitate what are described as ‘elaborate immigration scams’ to take place. And that can prove highly costly for the victims with these fake visas costing the deceived applicants between £15,000 and £20,000 .

You have been warned!

HAL Takes A Legal Hit

Catherine Johnson, Partner in Birketts’ Employment Team.

As if the Chancellor’s National Insurance nibble wasn’t enough the hospitality and leisure industries (HAL) are also being bitten by growing numbers of employment tribunal claims (indeed, what’s the odds that the two conditions might be linked?).

According to The Birketts View: Employment Tribunals in the Hospitality and Leisure Sector Impact Report 2025 HAL businesses had received an average of 44.53 tribunal claims over the past two years – 12% higher than the average across all sectors. Driving this trend, suggests the firm, are the underlying conditions of high staff turnover, casual working arrangements, and challenges in managing grievances effectively.

“The hospitality and leisure sector is particularly vulnerable to employment claims due to its reliance on casual and seasonal staff,” said Catherine Johnson, Partner in Birketts’ Employment Team.

Looking ahead the report warns that the Employment Rights Bill, which introduces ‘Day One’ rights to claim unfair dismissal, could lead to a surge in claims from employees who previously lacked the required length of service.

“The introduction of ‘day one’ rights under the Employment Rights Bill will likely increase the volume of claims, especially in areas like harassment and discrimination,” Johnson warns.

This is particularly pertinent given that the most common claims brought against HAL businesses were harassment related to a protected characteristic (15%).

“Employers must act now to strengthen their internal processes, provide robust training to line managers, and ensure grievances are handled effectively,” says Johnson. “Failure to do so could result in costly and time-consuming tribunal proceedings.”

Interestingly, another powerful factor in the tricky relationship between employer and employee is the availability of AI tools which can draft detailed complaints about workplace issues.

“As a result, employers appear to be increasingly faced with grievances that are longer, more complex, and sometimes contain significant inaccuracies, particularly in the interpretation of legal principles and even in the factual details.”

The solution, Johnson suggests, is to “Put an AI policy in place to proactively manage this.”

SOLLA Gains Youthful Energy

With an increasing number of us surviving into the 80+ age group demand is growing for expert professionals to specialise in their needs. Hence the creation of the Society of Later Life Advisers (SOLLA) back in 2008 as a not-for-profit organisation to provide an accreditation service for financial advisers working with older and vulnerable clients.

Getting the right people on to SOLLA’s Advisory Board is critical so the appointment of Ian Macara (above left) the Senior Partner of JE Bennett Law, the specialist Court of Protection firm, is much to be welcomed. As one of just sixty Office of the Public Guardian’s (OPG) accredited Panel Deputies and one of only approximately ten of their Public Guardians Macara clearly has the right credentails for the role.

“As an experienced Court of Protection lawyer I am well versed in the challenges faced in later life with respect to financial and property affairs,” said Macara. “Throughout my work – as an accredited OPG Panel Deputy, as well as frequently acting as professional deputy, professional attorney and supporting lay deputies and lay attorneys – it is my goal to improve the quality of support the elderly and vulnerable receive to help them manage their financial, property and health affairs.”

 Peter Barnett, SOLLA Advisory Board Chair, commented,  “It is with great pleasure that I am able to warmly welcome Ian Macara to the SOLLA Advisory Board. His longstanding experience as a practitioner in the legal landscape surrounding the elderly and vulnerable, will, I am sure, prove to be of tremendous value to both the Board and SOLLA more widely. In the broader later life landscape, our members and their clients will have the benefit of the breadth of his significant and varied legal experience and specialist knowledge, including acting with and for the vulnerable and potentially vulnerable in managing their legal, financial and care needs, thus ensuring better choices and outcomes for consumers more widely.”

Old age may not always be welcome but it’s good to know that there is some sage advice to assist when it arrives.

Edwin Coe Commits to Family Tree

In a tangential initiative to the law the Legal Diary is very interested in genealogical matters so it was fascinated to see that Edwin Coe is branching out from its own main focus to acquire Hoopers (G B Hooper & Son Limited), a well-established genealogical research business.

In an exciting vision of where some parts of the legal sector might be going Alison Broadberry, Edwin Coe’s Managing Partner and recent winner of a Citywealth Powerwomen Award. declares that the trend amongst ‘progressive law firms’ is to ‘have independent businesses owned alongside the legal practice’. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), the firm points out, has very strict rules in this situation but that it has consulted extensively with the SRA to ensure that Hoopers will be run as a fully compliant stand-alone business.

“I am delighted to welcome the team at Hoopers,” said Broadberry. “This acquisition underscores Edwin Coe’s continued commitment to growth and specialist work within the private capital sector. Hoopers values align strongly with our culture and with our mission to be Collaborative, Committed and Connected with all our stakeholders.”

The Hoopers core team will now move into new accommodation adjacent to Edwin Coe in Lincolns Inn. But with a strong track record and well-established skills to resolve issues around instacies it is likely that they will be seeing a lot of each other.

CONTRIBUTED ARTICLES OF THE WEEK

Advancing technology and delays in the court system

by Jennifer Richardson

The Leveson Review has brought into question whether Jury Trials are a cause of major delays in our judicial system. The truth is that there is no one cause. There are a myriad of issues, notwithstanding the backlog brought on by the pandemic or the industrial action taken by the Bar, and the crippling lack of funding over decades. Court time is now a precious commodity that we all strive to ration.

To make matters worse, financial crime trials are becoming lengthier by the day. While it was an anomaly a mere fifteen years ago, a three-month fraud trial has now become the norm despite always having been conducted before a Jury. So what has changed?

In one word: technology.

Technology has advanced at such a rate that most trials involve 10 times more evidence than previously. A multi-handed fraud trial in 2010 might have seen you served with 10,000 pages of evidence, consisting largely of letters, board minutes, bank statements, and a handful of emails. Today, business is conducted almost entirely electronically through email, Whatsapp, Skype, Teams etc. People are communicating 24/7. Where we used to phone a colleague or shout across an office, we now send a Teams message; and with this comes a never-ending paper trail of evidence, which must be presented to a Jury. In large cases, you can expect to be served with tens of thousands of pages as well as digital downloads of multiple devices. In one such case I dealt with we were provided with a digital download of our client’s laptop containing over four million ‘artefacts’.

Again, looking back you might have found that a defendant had a phone (and probably not a smart one) and a computer which would need to be seized and downloaded. Today, defendants often have multiple devices which need to be interrogated – phones, tablets, laptops, desktops, in some cases even games consoles. Law enforcement agencies such as the Serious Fraud Office are now using AI technology to expedite that process, resulting in further evidence being discovered and served.

We base our trial time estimates largely on the volume of evidence served on us. As that increases, so does court time as that evidence needs to be presented to a Jury. It is now common practice for Juries to be given ipads containing the bundle because the volume of evidence they are to be taken through is so vast.

I can only conclude that as a primary aggravating factor to the courts’ increasing backlog is the advances in technology which result in there being so many more sources of evidence to sort through than before.

Separate to this, developments in technology are also responsible for a wealth of new ways to commit crime: phishing fraud, money laundering through crypto-currency, finfluencers…the list goes on. Organised Crime Groups are taking advantage of developments in technology, and this has naturally led to an increased strain on our criminal justice system.

Jennifer Richardson is a partner at Blackfords Solicitors LLP

Parental child abduction over the summer holidays? Prevention is key

says Simran Gupta

Taking children abroad during the summer school holidays, especially if it is to visit family and friends is commonplace. Unfortunately, travelling abroad with children following a separation can be a real flash point and I frequently see both well-founded and unfounded concerns about the risk of abduction posed by the travelling parent.

My overarching advice when dealing with a potential risk of abduction (whether the removal of a child from England and Wales without consent, or a retention in a foreign jurisdiction past the period for which consent was given) is to utilise the court to prevent foreign travel, until the risk can be properly considered and managed.

Prevention here is very much best, as the remedies available following an abduction, to seek the return of a child to this jurisdiction, are largely dependent on the legal system in the foreign jurisdiction.

The key legislation we have is the 1980 Hague Convention¹, which requires summary proceedings to achieve a Return Order unless a defence can be made out. How the courts of the foreign jurisdiction implement the Convention, what weight they put on the defences and how long the process takes, are all country-dependent.

Where the foreign jurisdiction is not a signatory to the 1980 Convention, the process is even more complex. A Return Order needs to be obtained in England, relying on the High Court’s Inherent Jurisdiction and Wardship, and then enforcement of that order sought in the foreign jurisdiction. The extent to which another jurisdiction will respect an English Return Order is again country-dependent.

Another useful remedy, if there is an existing Child Arrangements Order is the 1996 Hague Convention², which provides for the recognition and registration of foreign orders in other signatory countries. This in turn allows for the enforcement of that order in the foreign jurisdiction.

All these remedies require the engagement of the Family Court in the foreign jurisdiction. This likely means an Applicant will be faced with the cost of obtaining legal advice and representation in that jurisdiction as well as, potentially, in England. They may also need to fund the cost of travel and accommodation in the foreign jurisdiction, the need for documents to be translated and the use of interpreters if proceedings are taking place in another language.

This can all be a barrier to the Applicant engaging in proceedings and obtaining the return of their child to this jurisdiction.

My takeaway advice is to act fast and prevent the removal before it happens.

Simran Gupta is a Senior Associate Solicitor, Family Law Team at SA Law

LEGAL COMMENT OF THE WEEK

TOPIC: ‘Peace’ Negotiations Over Ukraine

COMMENT BY: Roger Gherson, Senior Partner, Gherson Solicitors

 “Three and a half years into the war, it is clear that sanctions have not worked.

The sanctions regime has undermined the rule of law, the separation of powers and our entire legal system. The protections in Western democracies for individual human and property rights have been seriously weakened. Continued sanctions will not solve the problem but will only polarize the situation further. The only solution will be for the two sides to sit down across the table and reach a compromise.

The vested interests of different parties have so far prevented this, but ultimately this war will be brought to an end by negotiation and compromise, not sanctions, which have failed miserably to solve the problem.”

TOPIC: The unfair dismissal of a Barclays financial advisor accused of making sexual comments to female colleagues due to procedural errors

COMMENT BY: Simon Gilmour, Head of Employment, Harper James

“The recent Barclays tribunal decision is a reminder that even large employers with significant HR resources can fall short if they do not follow a fair process when handling misconduct allegations. For SMEs, where dedicated HR teams are often smaller or fall under the remit of the senior managers, the risks can be even greater.

“A fair and transparent process is essential. This means carrying out a thorough investigation, giving the employee a genuine opportunity to respond, and ensuring decisions are based on clear evidence and, unlike in the Barclays case, these decisions are made in a timely manner. Detailed record keeping and impartial decision-making are also critical, as tribunals will scrutinise these points closely.

“We see too many smaller businesses caught out by procedural errors rather than the substance of the misconduct itself. The lesson is clear: invest time in robust procedures, provide managers with training, and address inappropriate behaviour consistently. Doing so can protect your business from costly claims and reputational damage.”

TOPIC: The latest figures from the Ministry of Justice show there were 11,402 repossessions by county court bailiffs following a section 21 notice (no-fault eviction) in the period July 2023-June 2024 – an increase of 8% on the previous 12 months.

COMMENT BY: David Smith, Property Litigation Partner, Spector Constant & Williams

“The latest Q2 2025 possession statistics make unhappy reading for both landlords and tenants.

“While total possession claims have actually fallen for the third consecutive quarter, the median time for landlords to regain possession has risen yet again. It is taking almost three extra weeks in most cases, with no sign of real progress in tackling the court delays that continue to plague the system.

“No-fault evictions (Section 21) remain a flashpoint, with bailiff-led repossessions up 8% in Labour’s first year, despite the Renters’ Rights Bill being in its final stages. This is because although the number of possession claims have fallen, a higher number are leading to possession orders as landlords in London continue to evict at a high rate, presumably to exit the market. The Government’s view is that most accelerated possession claims will disappear once Section 21 goes, but in my view, we will simply see a sharp increase in other types of possession claims, which will in turn lengthen delays further.

“With private rental sector supply flat, there is an urgent need to restore landlord confidence. Court bottlenecks, longer timelines, and an uncertain regulatory horizon will not achieve that. Without that confidence, tenants will ultimately feel the impact through reduced availability and higher rents.”

TOPIC: The CMS 2025 Class Action Report

COMMENT BY: Martyn Day, Co-President of CORLA (The Collective Redress Lawyers Association)

 “The figures in this report seek to give a misleading impression of the UK’s collective actions regime (CAT).

Counting over 650 million class members in CAT claims takes no account of overlap of consumers and obviously says nothing about whether those claims succeed.

One must always bear in mind when reading research reports who the author is. This data comes from a defendant-focused law firm that advises a lobby group financed by the US Chamber of Commerce, whose sole purpose is to fight for the interests of US corporate giants, so it is steely in its determination to obstruct collective proceedings in the UK against Goliath companies and thwart access to justice for UK consumers and UK businesses. This is yet another example of the US Chamber of Commerce trying to meddle in the UK justice system.

The report also omits outcomes. The regime is still in its early days, and class actions are of course subject to strict CAT scrutiny. The regime’s success should be judged by its outcomes, its ability to hold corporate wrongdoers to account and secure fair redress for consumers, not by the number of claims filed.”

CORLA is the voice of its members who are UK claimant law firms active in the CAT. 

TOPIC: The success of Natural England’s Species Recovery Programme in helping support more than 150 species, many of which were on the brink of national extinction through creating habitat, captive breeding and translocating wildlife

COMMENT BY: Penny Simpson, partner in the environmental law team, Freeths

“This story is illustrative of a key issue in this country – that public funding and philanthropy cannot restore nature as we need.  As stated by Tony Juniper and Richard Benwell this country needs  private funding invested into nature through nature markets and this in turn needs more extensive “demand drivers” to incentivise these markets; a decision by Government to retain in full the existing mandatory BNG (Biodiversity Net Gain) regime rather than to curtail it as has been suggested by the recent BNG consultation; and a greater recognition of the role of private markets in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. The Government’s promised revised Environmental Improvement Plan will be crucial in this as will the way that this is rolled out to create sector targets which may well need to be mandatory not voluntary.”

LEGAL SECTOR APPOINTMENT OF THE WEEK

OSBORNES LAW

Hugh Johnson has been appointed as the new head of medical negligence at Osbornes Law. Previously with Stewarts where he was a partner for six years Johnson has 20 years’ experience of medical negligence litigation, with a particular specialism representing claimants with life-changing brain and spinal injuries. He is accredited by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) as a senior litigator and is ranked in both Chambers and Legal 500 directories as a leading partner and specialist in the medical negligence field. He is the co-author of Lewis & Buchan on Clinical Negligence (eight edition) and it is calculated that in the course of his career he has secured more than £65 million in damages for his clients.

“We could think of no-one better to lead our medical negligence team,” said Joanne Wescott, managing partner of Osbornes Law. “Our team already know Hugh well and we have no doubt that he will provide steady leadership and successfully steer the team to achieve further growth.”

We hope that you’ve been interested or amused by something in this week’s LEGAL DIARY. If so do send on to colleagues.

And please continue sending your ‘Diary-type’ stories, insights legal comment and appointments to

fennell.edward@yahoo.com