Edward Fennell’s LEGAL DIARY
Diary news plus insights, commentary and appointments from the legal world
26 September 2025
Editorial contact: fennell.edward@yahoo.com
SHORT THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK: IDENTITY CRISIS
As evidenced by our LEGAL COMMENT section (below), immigration and how to control it is the compelling issue of the week. It has, however, been supercharged by the Government’s mapping out of the introduction of identity cards and the suggestion that this would support the fight against illegal working.
However, as Emma Brooksbank, an immigration Partner at Freeths, has pointed out (along with many others), “It is difficult to see how the Government’s proposal to introduce Digital ID will make any difference to illegal working in the UK. Right to work checks were introduced decades ago, in 1996, and current illegal working legislation has been in place since 2008. Digital ID will simply mean that compliant employers need to adapt their processes, and those who choose to ignore the rules and employ people illegally will continue to do so.”
In fact, there are plenty of sensible reasons for creating what might be called a UK Identity and Entitlement digital wallet which brings together in a single coherent system NHS, passport, rights of residence and other key pieces of information in order to rationalise an individual’s relationship with the state and other key institutions. But the emphasis on promoting it should be on rights and entitlements. By positioning the measure as one of coercion and control the Starmer regime has alienated many potential supporters (not, it must be said, for the first time).
The LegalDiarist
In this edition
+ LEGAL DIARY OF THE WEEK
KEEPING ABREAST OF CYBER LAW
THIRD PARTY ARBITRATION FUNDING: HERE’S HOW TO DO IT
THACKRAY WILLIAMS CHALLENGES THE WORLD OVER NEURODIVERSITY
MIGRATE UK MIGRATES TO HARWELL
+ CONTRIBUTED ARTICLES OF THE WEEK
UNEXPLAINED WEALTH ORDERS START TO STRIKE HOME by Helen Briant
STARTING OUT IN THE LAW STILL NOT A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD argues Kate Gaskell
+ LEGAL COMMENT OF THE WEEK
on identity cards, the international student levy, Trump on H-IB immigrants and Farage on permanent settlement in the UK, HNW’s confidence (or not) in the UK economy
+ APPOINTMENTS OF THE WEEK
Andersen LLP and Paul Hastings LLP
LEGAL DIARY OF THE WEEK
KEEPING ABREAST OF CYBER LAW
Like a progressive but pervasive music track the world of cyber is infiltrating all our working lives. And with it comes the need to keep on top of the extending legal framework. Fortunately a group of legal experts, acting globally. have developed a resource to enable national governments, the military, and academics to understand how international law applies to cyber activities.
By combining new scenarios with updated incidents and national positions, the annual update of the Cyber Law Toolkit provides a reliable reference resource covering the legal challenges raised by cyber operations. Including a database of the views of 35 States as well as the positions of the African Union and European Union the Toolkit enables countries to examine how others interpret and apply international law in the cyber context. The Toolkit now features 35 scenarios, each blending a description of a cyber incident with in-depth legal analysis and the latest material explores highly topical issues such as accountability for crimes against humanity committed through cyber means, and data collection in occupied territory.
With an editorial team led by Professor Kubo Mačák (University of Exeter), Tomáš Minárik (Czech National Cyber and Information Security Agency), and Otakar Horák (NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence) all contributions undergo rigorous internal and external peer review.
“Each year, the Toolkit evolves to reflect how international law is being tested and shaped by cyber activities,” said Professor Mačák. “The 2025 update ensures that policymakers, legal advisers, and scholars have access to up-to-date, reliable guidance on these rapidly developing issues.”
Earlier this year, the Cyber Law Toolkit received the prestigious Jus Gentium Research Award of the American Society of International Law, recognising its contributions to providing and enhancing legal information resources in international law.
NOTE: The project team is now inviting proposals for new scenarios for inclusion in the 2026 update. Each submission should describe a hypothetical cyber incident and discuss the international legal issues it presents. The submission deadline is 14 November 2025. Successful authors will receive an honorarium. For more information on the submission process, download the full details here: Cyber Law Toolkit: Call for Submissions for the 2026 Annual Update (PDF).
THIRD PARTY ARBITRATION FUNDING: HERE’S HOW TO DO IT
With the growing adoption of third-party funding of arbitration cases there has been an appetite for a quasi-regulatory framework on how it should be undertaken. So a warm welcome is being given to the launch by the Chartered Institute of Arbitration (Ciarb) of its much-anticipated Guideline on Third-Party Funding which aims to demystify the third-party funding process. “Over the past decade, third-party funding has become an integrated aspect of the arbitration ecosystem,” said Mercy McBrayer FCIArb, Head of Arbitration Professional Practice at Ciarb. “Ciarb’s sense is that practitioners are seeking guidance on best practices when parties wish to leverage it as a tool to facilitate dispute resolution”.
Founded in 1915 and granted a Royal Charter in 1979 Ciarb is probably the most respected organization of its kind in the world and so it was natural for its Policy team to work with the Professional Practice Guideline Drafting Committee and a group of funding experts globally to produce this Guideline.
“The Third-Party Funding Guideline offers a clear and accessible roadmap for legal practitioners – regardless of their level of experience – to navigate the complexities of third-party funding,” said Dr Hasan Tahsin Azizagaoglu, Co-Chair of the Guideline. “This Guideline is unique in its commitment to full transparency, detailing the relevant questions to ask funders, explaining how they make decisions, and shedding light on how funding arrangements evolve behind the scenes. We welcome and value feedback from all practitioners, recognising that individual experiences and preferences regarding litigation funders can differ widely.”
Philippa Charles FCIArb, Co-Chair of the Guideline said, “We want the Guideline to provide participants in arbitration cases, whether seeking funding, or dealing with a funded party, with information and insight about the process of funding and how a case involving a funded party may evolve. While the Drafting Committee contains representation from practitioners and funders, we are keen to ensure that a multiplicity of viewpoints on these matters is contained in the Guideline to make it as useful as possible.”
Jeremy Marshall, Chief investment officer of Winward Litigation Finance, gave a warm welcome to the guidance. “It is refreshing to read a guide that is so clearly written with the benefit of expert funder input,” he said. “It will inevitably assist tribunals as they navigate their way through the funders’ world and put to bed any perception of litigation funding being opaque and mysterious.”
Download the Guideline here https://www.ciarb.org/media/xbbegf1e/guidelines-on-third-party-funding_-published-final.pdf
THACKRAY WILLIAMS CHALLENGES THE WORLD OVER NEURODIVERSITY
The fourth annual Global ADHD Conference will take place on October 2-3 and, remarkably, will span the globe by running for 24 hours across all time zones. The aim is simple but ambitious – to raise ADHD understanding individually, locally, nationally and worldwide.
Playing a key part in it will be the leading neurodiversity lawyer Emma Thompson, the Managing Partner at Thackray Williams, a firm which is building a specialism in neurodiversity.
Led by Ms Thompson, who also heads the Employment and Education sectors, the firm has been doing an increasing amount of work to support individuals who have been discriminated against because of their neurodiversity. In addition it advises businesses, schools and public bodies to ensure they are compliant and implementing practices that enable people to flourish.
In the light of this specialist commitment – which had included a successful challenge of a discriminatory exam policy – Ms Thompson was an obvious candidate to speak at the conference.
“Unfortunately, the legal support group I run with ADHD UK has brought home to me how many neurodiverse people are experiencing discrimination in multiple areas of their lives – particularly at work or in education,” she says. “The instructions we’re receiving at Thackray Williams show that too many organisations are failing neurodiverse pupils and staff. As an employment lawyer with a specialism in education, I’m delighted to be able to help them challenge unacceptable practices, and to be supporting people across the world by sharing how we are successfully challenging discrimination to enable those with it to thrive – both for their benefit and for wider society.”
MIGRATE UK MIGRATES TO HARWELL
Amidst the chronic debate about immigration and the UK’s need to attract and retain more international talent the specialist immigration firm Migrate UK has made a sharp move by setting up shop at Harwell, the UK’s leading science & innovation campus.
Led by veteran immigration specialist Jonathan Beech the dozen or so members of the Migrate UK team will sit alongside other businesses at Harwell’s Innovation Centre. With over 200 organizations based at Harwell campus, the site is can claim to be a focus for some of the world’s brightest minds working for outfits such as the European Space Agency’s European satellite and space telecommunications centre (ECSAT).
“We knew this move was right for us after receiving a Harwell-based business enquiry even before we moved in!” said Beech who has worked for the UK Government as well as KPMG and Ernst & Young. “ We realised that we could provide face-to-face support to so many firms in minutes if we moved to the campus.
“We also recognised that the Innovation Centre will not just provide us with office space, but wider business support and greater opportunities to develop with such a collaborative and inspirational range of businesses which are leading the world in science and technology.
“Thanks to our work with science and technology organisations nationwide, we’re already familiar with the talent shortages many face and the need for highly skilled employees. For example, latest reports suggest that there will be a 133,000-worker deficit in the UK life sciences sector by 2030.
We’re used to managing and supporting clients in overseas talent recruitment and navigating the ever-changing immigration rules. Our own new start-up, the online global talent firm, Immpact, will work alongside Migrate UK to support firms in an even wider range of sectors meet their global talent needs.”
According to Michelle Webb, Centre Manager, Harwell Innovation Centre, Oxford Innovation Space, “Migrate UK will enhance the campus’s collaborative environment by providing tailored immigration services crucial for attracting and retaining global talent.”
CONTRIBUTED ARTICLES OF THE WEEK
UNEXPLAINED WEALTH ORDERS START TO STRIKE HOME
By Helen Briant
The sale of Hope Springs House marks a significant milestone in the UK’s use of Unexplained Wealth Orders (UWOs), with over £1.1 million recovered for the public purse. This is the first successful UWO recovery by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and only one of a handful of applications since the power was introduced under the Criminal Finances Act 2017.
The order was made against Claire Schools, the ex-wife of Timothy Schools, a former solicitor convicted in 2022 for orchestrating a £146 million fraud through the Cayman Islands-based Axiom Legal Financing Fund. Mr Schools was sentenced to 14 years in prison and admitted to transferring over £1 million to others, including Claire. She used some of these funds to purchase and renovate Hope Springs House, but was unable to provide a legitimate explanation for the source of the money.
UWOs are a relatively new legal tool that allow law enforcement agencies to compel individuals to explain how they acquired certain assets—typically high-value properties—when there is suspicion of criminal conduct. If the explanation is inadequate, the property can be seized.
The recovery of £1.1 million is a positive outcome but as the legal and investigative costs involved in securing such orders are not publicly disclosed, it is difficult to assess their overall value, and as enforcement agencies develop their tools and routes to recovery, fraudsters will continue to evolve their methods in hiding their assets and finding ways around the enforcement powers. However, the symbolic importance of this case is clear: it shows that associates and family members of fraudsters are not beyond reach and that UWOs are being used to recover proceeds of crime that might otherwise remain hidden.
That said, in this case, the UWO was not a silver bullet to substantial further recovery in that Mr Schools had misappropriated £146 million and the Court ensured information sought from Mrs Schools by the SFO was limited to legitimate questions about the property. The Court refused the request for information around Mrs Schools’ early relationship with, and initial separation from, her ex-husband. It seems clear that the Court will limit questions to be asked of the Defendant to unexplained wealth rather than wider information gathering.
This case may not open the floodgates to widespread use of UWOs, but it does demonstrate that they are another useful tool to recover misappropriated funds and will hopefully serve as a deterrent.
Helen Briant is a partner in the Dispute Resolution and Litigation team at Trowers & Hamlins, specialising in commercial litigation and arbitration.
STARTING OUT IN THE LAW STILL NOT A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD argues Kate Gaskell
With just 25% of those with law degrees securing a training contract, it’s well recognised that there are long-standing biases in the sector. This is across a number of different diversity characteristics, and progress is being made on some of those characteristics at a greater rate than others. It’s only been recently that firms have been addressing diversity through the lens of socio-economic background, and the often-related, lens of educational privilege. Whilst progress has been made, delaying this groundwork means that the legal industry is yet to catch up to other sectors, and the bias is still looming.
The Russell Group bias
Favouring a Russell Group university degree is rooted in tradition, and it’s a habit that firms have evidently found hard to break. It may stem from affinity bias, and the unconscious preference interviewers have for candidates with similar backgrounds to their own. Many partners came from these universities, so the Russell Group status has wrongfully been used as a shortcut, and any alternative route has more easily been excluded.
Diversity markers are disconnected
The bias is not just one of education – it could actually be considered a rejection of anyone who doesn’t fit the profile recruiters are already familiar with. This wide gap in diversity took years to address, and then attempt to reverse, but not every marker has been treated equally.
The share of lawyers in SRA-regulated law firms from lower socio-economic backgrounds reduced from 21% in 2015 to 18% in 2023. It’s not just a push for diversity we need, but a recognition of intersectionality and an understanding of equity.
Representation needs to start at the top
As we wait for DEI initiatives to progress, there’s a delay in senior positions becoming representative of the entry-level talent pool. By pushing for more diversity at senior roles – and also encouraging more people at the top who have come from those backgrounds to make themselves known and visible – juniors will be more able to benefit from quality mentorship time, and better access to support, resources, and networks.
The legal profession will always have more applicants than it does vacancies, but all firms have a responsibility to create a more level playing field. Inclusive hiring practices and awareness training not only challenges these biases, but creates employee loyalty, increases retention rate, and fosters a true culture of belonging.
Kate Gaskell is the the CEO of FlexLegal
LEGAL COMMENT OF THE WEEK
TOPIC: The Government’s proposal to introduce high tech Identity cards
COMMENT BY: Oliver O’Sullivan, Director of Immigration, Migrate UK.
“It’s interesting that the UK government are looking to reintroduce an ID card proposal given the overwhelming opposition to these cards in the past. Framing them in the context of preventing illegal workers doesn’t fully address issues that most people held previously with civil liberty.
“In reality, if you’ve applied for a British passport recently or otherwise verified your identity with the UK government via a Gov.UK website, you already have the essence of a digital passport with the government.
“Like the EU settlement scheme, digital IDs face resistance from a new generation of people resistant to sharing sensitive information online, while also struggling with a large population of people who are not familiar with digital technologies who will struggle to complete the process.
“Illegal working is often the result of employers who don’t check right to work, or don’t know how to do it correctly. Will digital ID cards reduce illegal working? Not if the main reason for illegal working is employers knowingly hiring a person without permission to work, or not doing the right checks in the first place. Right to work checks aren’t failing because of the documents involved.“
TOPIC: The Government’s proposed international student levy which could mean a £1.8 billion loss to the economy in the first year alone
COMMENT BY: Natasha Chell, Partner and Head of Risk and Compliance, Laura Devine Immigration
“The proposed levy risks sending a damaging signal to prospective international students at a time when the UK is actively competing to attract global talent. The levy flies in the face of the government’s objective to attract the brightest and best talent, while overlooking the vital contribution international students make to the economy and to the UK’s skills pipeline – including in shortage occupations. At a moment when long-term immigration and labour market strategies depend on a steady inflow of skilled individuals, introducing a levy is not only disappointing but potentially harmful to one of the UK’s most successful export industries.”
COMMENT BY: Simon Kenny, Immigration and Global Mobility Partner, Spencer West LLP
“There was a reduction of around 25,000 in the number of Student visa applications made the UK in the last 12 months. A surcharge on tuition fees, which may be passed on to students, is likely to add pressure within the sector and oblige universities to find new ways to generate revenue. Significantly lower numbers of international students would be a major threat to the finances of universities.
Immigration restrictions and increased application fees already appear to be having an impact on international student recruitment. Further rises in application fee are likely to increase that challenge.”
COMMENT BY: Lisa Uttley, Immigration Partner, Gherson Solicitors
“This is a short-sighted way of trying to raise money for the UK’s tax coffers. Fewer international students will directly impact on how much income UK universities can raise and in turn, the number of places that they can make available to domestic students. A move like this could also undermine the UK’s status as a prime destination for first-tier education which is currently a key draw for many highly skilled international professionals who make the decision to relocate with their families.”
TOPIC: Reform UK’s proposal to abolish the right of migrants to qualify for permanent settlement in the UK after five years
COMMENT BY: Ashley Stothard, immigration lawyer, Freeths
“Reform’s proposal to abolish Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) is outrageous. It undermines the rights of lawful migrants who have contributed to the UK socially, economically, and culturally. These individuals have built lives, families, and careers here, often over many years, and to suggest retrospectively removing their status is not only unjust, it is unworkable.
“This kind of policy rhetoric is deeply harmful. It targets individuals and families whose only “offence” is choosing the UK as their home. Rather than offering solutions, it stokes division and uncertainty and disregards the fundamental principle of fairness and compassion that should underpin our immigration system. I would urge all parties to engage in responsible dialogue that reflects the values of a modern, inclusive British society.”
TOPIC: President Trump’s proclamation ‘Restriction on Entry of Certain Non-immigrant Workers’ which appeared to impose sweeping restrictions on H-1B workers.
COMMENT BY: Christi Jackson, Partner and Head of the US Practice, Laura Devine Immigration
“The initial interpretation of the September 19 proclamation caused significant confusion and concern across the immigration landscape. The prospect of a $100,000 supplemental fee and the apparent restriction on re-entry for H-1B workers abroad prompted urgent action from employers, attorneys, and visa holders. Fortunately, subsequent clarifications from USCIS, CBP, and the White House confirmed that the new requirements apply only to future H-1B petitions, not to current beneficiaries or those already admitted to the U.S.
“While that guidance provided immediate relief, serious questions remain. The introduction of such an unprecedented fee raises fundamental concerns about access, fairness, and the sustainability of the H-1B program, particularly for smaller employers. This situation underscores the fragility of the current system and highlights the broader volatility of U.S. immigration policy.”
TOPIC: The Saltus Wealth Index Report’s results which showed that High Net Worth individuals’ confidence in the UK economy has improved but is still far below the 84% recorded before Labour’s first Budget.
COMMENT BY: Frederick Bjorn, Private Client Partner, at Payne Hicks Beach
“It is surprising to see an increase in confidence given the adverse impact of the current political and fiscal backdrop for UK based High Net Worth Individuals (HNWI). That said, those who were particularly low on confidence may already have left in desperation. For many, they see tax rises as inevitable. However, it is the uncertainty which undermines the confidence of HNWIs and in some cases causes them to quit the UK, and another Autumn of speculation is fuelling the fire. The Report points to the confidence of HNWIs being fragile and highlights the balance the Government must strike in the forthcoming Budget between raising money and boosting the economy.”
LEGAL SECTOR APPOINTMENTS OF THE WEEK
ANDERSEN LLP
Rehana Earle (left) is joining Andersen LLP as a Partner in the firm’s Global Mobility practice while Poonam Parmar is joining as Director.
Previously with Blick Rothenberg where she led the led the Global Mobility practice and, prior to that, with seventeen years at PwC and Vialto, Earle has advised multinational corporations across a broad range of industries, as well as high-growth companies embarking on their global mobility journeys.
“I’m excited to be joining Andersen’s journey,” said Earle. “Their global mobility services model is truly differentiated – combining deep technical excellence with innovative digital solutions to deliver outstanding value for clients.”
Parmar has more than a decade of specialist global mobility experience gained also at PwC and Vialto. She has worked with clients across multiple sectors and has particular expertise in the Sports and Entertainment industry. “Andersen’s progressive global mobility strategy enables me to serve clients more effectively,” she said.
Robbie Wigley-Jones, Andersen’s Partner and EMEA Head of Global Mobility, commented, “Rehana’s leadership credentials and extensive people experience will be instrumental in expanding our UK offering, while Poonam’s client-focused approach and sector expertise will strengthen our presence in key priority areas.”
PAUL HASTING LLP
Sally Evans (left) is joining the London office of Paul Hastings LLPas a Partner in the firm’s antitrust platform
Previously with Kirkland & Ellis, Evans has extensive experience across antitrust matters in major global jurisdictions, with a concentration on U.K. merger control. She has frequently represented clients before the U.K. Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and is dual-qualified in Brussels, where she also leads EU merger control cases. She has advised on matters such as Thoma Bravo’s $12.3 billion agreement to take Dayforce private; Triton Partners’ acquisition of the Bosch security and communications technology product business; and Noble Corporation on its combination with Maersk Drilling, subject to a Phase I remedy agreed with the UK Competition and Markets Authority, involving the divestment of oil drilling platforms in the North Sea.
“Sally has extraordinary experience and a stellar reputation in antitrust and will provide further momentum to our global antitrust practice,” said firm Chair Frank Lopez. “Such premier antitrust talent is integral to our strategic priority to build not only a global destination platform, but essential and synergistic to winning and executing M&A mandates at the top of the market.”
We hope that you’ve been interested or amused by something in this week’s LEGAL DIARY. If so please do send on to colleagues.
And please continue sending your ‘Diary-type’ stories, insights legal comment and appointments to
fennell.edward@yahoo.com