Edward Fennell’s LEGAL DIARY
Diary news plus insights, commentary and appointments from the legal world
28 December 2025
Editorial contact: fennell.edward@yahoo.com
SHORT THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK: Still working over Twixmas? Well don’t let it go to waste.
Congratulations if you are at work and reading this over the period when, for most of us, one day blends into the next and the clock as well as the calendar goes out of the window.
One of the best pieces of advice on offer for what to do at this time of year comes from Josh Peacock, co-founder of SalaryGuide, who says this period can be turned to good account through a focus on cutting the unnecessary and focusing on efficiency.
“Most people accumulate far more digital tools than they realise,” he says. “Use this quiet window to review the apps, platforms, and browser extensions you rely on each day. Remove anything you don’t use, update tools you still depend on, check that integrations are working smoothly, and adjust notifications so you’re not constantly distracted.
“This sort of digital declutter can have a surprisingly big impact. Fewer tools mean less cognitive load, fewer updates, and less friction, allowing you to work more smoothly without the clutter of unused or outdated tech slowing you down.”
All sounds good advice to the Legal Diarist whose annual New Year’s resolution since 2020 has been to declutter. So this year, maybe?
Meanwhile, in an otherwise static period on the hiring and firing front, do read our APPOINTMENT OF THE YEAR of Noel Firtree. Looks like the man’s got a big job on his hands but a smile on his face (although, sadly no photographs were actually made available by his new employer). Decluttering is certainly on his agenda.
Best Wishes for 2026
The LegalDiarist
In this edition
+ LEGAL DIARY OF THE WEEK
Unanimity on Retaining Juries from Four Bars
Brimelow Takes Mantle from Mills
Clarke Willmott’s Seasonal Celebration of Social Mobility
Criminal Courts – London versus New York
+ CONTRIBUTED ARTICLE OF THE WEEK
CHILDREN FACING ECONOMIC ABUSE by Rhiannon Lloyd
+ LEGAL COMMENT OF THE WEEK
on government U-turn over farm inheritance, the mental health Act and PACCAR reversal
+ APPOINTMENT OF THE YEAR
at Dec25 Enterprises
LEGAL DIARY OF THE WEEK
Unanimity on Retaining Juries from Four Bars
In what might seem a remarkable demonstration of unity from the three United Kingdom Bars plus the Irish bar a joint statement has been issued on the Government’s response to Sir Brian Leveson’s criminal courts review. With one voice Barbara Mills KC, Chair, Bar Council of England & Wales, Roddy Dunlop KC, Dean, Faculty of Advocates, Seán Guerin SC, Chair, The Bar of Ireland and Donal Lunny KC, Chair, The Bar of Northern Ireland, have all implored Starmer and Lammy to think again. It is so significant that we reproduce theri statement here in full.
“The Four Bars are deeply concerned that the UK government is planning to restrict the right to a jury trial in England and Wales,” they say.”Being tried by a jury of one’s peers is a fundamental cornerstone of the criminal justice system in our respective jurisdictions. As Lord Judge CJ said in R v Twomey [2009] EWCA Crim 1035; [2010] 1 WLR 630,‘trial by jury is a hallowed principle of the administration of criminal justice’.
“The proposal has drawn substantial and widespread criticism from legal experts and politicians from across the political spectrum. There is no evidence that this fundamental change will bring down the existing Crown Court backlog. The proposal also goes further than Sir Brian Leveson’s recommendation, which itself has not been piloted nor thoroughly modelled. Importantly, he alerts the Ministry of Justice to the desirability of further detailed analysis before implementation.
“The curtailment of jury trials has predictable negative consequences, including undermining the public’s trust and confidence in our criminal justice systems. Trial by a jury is long established and respected throughout the common law world for its veneration of democratic ideals, its age, gender and ethnic inclusiveness, and its respect for citizens’ and judges’ roles in the administration of justice. Jurors provide an accumulation of life experience which marginalises extreme or unrepresentative views and, through the majority, delivers balanced and rounded decisions on behalf of the society from which its members were drawn.
“The Four Bars stand as one in opposition to this proposal. Legislation is still some time away – the government has time to listen to the views we express and to change course.”
Given the Government’s increasing proclivity to U-turn there might be scope for a reversal ahead. Or, as the former head of the Crown Prosecution Service, would that be the one back-down that Starmer could not stomach?
Brimelow Takes Mantle from Mills
Signing the plea to the Government over jury trials (as above) might be one of Barbara Mills KC’s most significant but also final acts as Chair of the Bar Council. Into her place on this Thursday will step Kirsty Brimelow KC who practises in criminal, international and public law at Doughty Street Chambers.
At this point all the members of the Bar Council’s leadership team will be women including Heidi Stonecliffe KC (Crown Prosecution Service) as Vice Chair, Lucinda Orr (Enyo Law) as Treasurer, and Amelia Clegg (BCL Solicitors) as Chair of the Young Barristers’ Committee.
“I will lead with courage and kindness,” announced Brimelow whose credentials are impressive and varied. For example, between 2017 and 2021 she worked on passing the first UN resolution on the elimination of harmful practices related to accusations of witchcraft and ritual attacks. While back in the UK she led the proposal and drafting of FGM (female genital mutilation) protection orders into law. In 2018 she was the recipient of both the Pro Bono International Barrister of the Year award and the First 100 Years Inspirational Woman in Law Barrister of the Year award. She is a trustee of the global environmental charity WWF UK and an elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts for her service to human rights.
Meanwhile on the home front she was appointed a deputy High Court judge in the King’s Bench Division and in 2022 appointed a Recorder. She has made clear that she will follow Mills in opposing the abandonment of jury trials“ I will bring my cross-jurisdictional expertise to overcome challenges and embrace opportunities for barristers and people delivering and accessing justice,” she says.
Clarke Willmott’s Seasonal Celebration of Social Mobility
Coming to year’s end Clarke Willmott has been putting the focus not on its billing but on its giving and support for communities across the UK
In particular the firm’s two year old Social Mobility Foundation (SMF) has grown significantly with lawyers involved in mentoring and employability support for students from under-represented backgrounds. This included notably a sixth-form e-mentor programme, with 19 students supported, while two undergraduate e-mentors supported a further two students. The programme has now scaled up so there will be 25 e-mentors supporting 28 undergraduate mentees. There has also been participation in Recruitment Success Service and the Personal Statement Checking Service. Meanwhile volunteers took part in an SMF Insight Panel and SMF Creating Connections events, reaching more than 100 students in total.
Activity went on right across the country. In Birmingham, for example, the office supported social enterprise charity Jericho through a seasonal appeal, donating care boxes to those in need. And in Cardiff funds were raised for homelessness charity Llamau through a range of activities, including a Cardiff Half Marathon run and a Christmas Jumper Day fundraiser. There was also involvement in environmental initiatives such as the record-breaking Tidy the Taff event as part of Spring Clean Cymru. Charitable fund-raising has also been important with over £3,000 raised for local charities thereby securing a further £1,450 in matched funding.
“We are incredibly proud of the commitment our people have shown to making a positive difference,” said Peter Swinburn, the Clarke Willmott CEO. “From supporting social mobility through our work with the Social Mobility Foundation to backing local charities chosen by our regional offices, this work reflects our values and our belief that success should be shared. The energy, generosity and compassion shown across the firm this year has been inspiring.”
Sounds like others could follow their example.
Criminal Courts – London versus New York
Thanks to Umar Zeb, (pictured) Senior Partner and London Defence Lawyer at JD Spicer Zeb for sharing with us some reflections on a recent visit to the Manhattan courthouse in New York city.
Given perceptions on the USA right now you might have thought that it was chaos personified but, on the contrary. it was calm and orderly.
“One of the most striking observations was the standard of publicly funded defence work in New York,” reports Zeb. “Far removed from popular Hollywood portrayals of the American criminal courts, the level of preparation, organisation and courtroom advocacy displayed by NYCDS lawyers was highly impressive. Despite operating within a public defence framework, they consistently matched the well-resourced District Attorney’s Office with skill, professionalism and commitment.
What was also striking was the‘substantial and visible security presence’ which created a strong sense of safety without causing disruption or delay. “Court staff were welcoming and efficient, clearly supported by the security arrangements in place.”
All quite a contrast to London, observes Zeb considering that outside Willesden Magistrates’ Court recently a man was killed after attending a hearing to support a family member.
“Attacks in and around London courts are not rare,” he continues. “The comparatively limited security means that lawyers and court staff are regularly exposed to harassment, abuse and violence. Weapons can and do enter court buildings. I have personally found a knife in a cell previously occupied by a prisoner, an experience that was both unprecedented and deeply concerning. I have also witnessed police officers being violently assaulted inside court buildings.”
Something else for David Lammy to think about?
For more go to: https://www.jdspicer.co.uk/site/blog/crime-fraud/umar-zeb-hosted-by-the-new-york-city-county-defender-service
CONTRIBUTED ARTICLE OF THE WEEK
CHILDREN FACING ECONOMIC ABUSE
Research from charity Surviving Economic Abuse reveals that almost 4 million UK children are affected by economic abuse within their families What are the legal implications? asks Rhiannon Lloyd
There is currently a difference in the approach to an allegation of economic abuse depending on whether the case is about child arrangements or financial remedy following divorce. In either case a court will only take it into account if it is proven or established, either when the court has made a finding following a trial, the perpetrator has made an admission, or a criminal conviction has occurred.
There is explicit recognition within the law that economic abuse is a safeguarding risk for a child that is recognised as harmful to the child’s welfare. However, the difficulty for victims comes in proving the abuse and, if it is not accompanied by other more ‘physical’ forms of abuse, persuading a judge that it is relevant and should have a significant impact on contact. Courts often don’t link financial issues with contact arrangements. That is because courts dealing with children have child welfare as their central guiding factor. That means trying to weigh many different things that bear upon wellbeing, including the fact that the child may have a positive and loving relationship with the parent who is failing to pay maintenance consistently. However, economic abuse is rarely unaccompanied by other forms of abuse and control, meaning it becomes more difficult to ignore the harm caused but still as difficult to prove it.
Often fathers who feel their contact is being unreasonably reduced or limited will reduce the maintenance in retaliation, even though the person who this ultimately impacts is the child they apparently love and want to see.
When parties’ assets are being divided, it becomes even more difficult for a victim to succeed in arguing that abuse should mean they get more of the assets. Economic abuse falls under the category of ‘conduct’ when a court is assessing and balancing the impact of the s25 MCA factors on a financial claim. To persuade a court that this conduct is relevant is hard as the bar has been set very high: the conduct has to be so bad that it is inequitable to regard, both obvious and gross. It also has to have clear financial consequences.
Many practitioners feel there is still a failure to recognise that less dramatic, more subtle, and attritive forms of psychological abuse can have a devastating aspect on all areas of a victim’s life which have cumulative financial and other impacts.
This is a very hot topic in family law circles right now as many judges and practitioners feel this is all unfair. There is a fear among some that allowing it in would overwhelm the courts as allegations of this type are so common. It doesn’t sit well with may practitioners that the court should look the other way because doing otherwise is just too inconvenient.
Rhiannon Lloyd is a Family Law Barrister at 4PB
LEGAL COMMENT OF THE WEEK
TOPIC: The Mental Health Act 2025 which provides the legal framework to detain and treat people in a mental health crisis who are at risk of harm to themselves or others
COMMENT BY: Rebecca Fitzpatrick, Partner and Head of Health Advisory and Inquests, Browne Jacobson
“We welcome the Mental Health Act 2025 receiving royal assent. This represents a significant step forward in modernising mental health legislation, and placing patient choice and autonomy at the heart of the system.
“We particularly welcome the reforms strengthening the voice of patients subject to the Act and ensuring detention is only used when, and for as long as, strictly necessary.
“However, our previously raised concerns regarding adequate resourcing and effective implementation of these reforms remain. Robust community services must be available to support individuals with autism and learning disabilities, underpinned by an appropriate legal framework to safeguard their welfare.
“We look forward to the government’s promised consultation and further announcements on the Liberty Protection Safeguards, which we anticipate in early 2026.”
TOPIC: Changes to the Government’s proposed reform of Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR).
COMMENT BY: Iwan Williams, private wealth partner, Michelmores
“This is a very welcome (and some would say long overdue) change to the Inheritance Tax reforms. It follows months of lobbying by bodies such as the CLA and the NFU, who have strongly argued that the changes would have had a profound and hugely damaging impact on rural businesses.
“The proposed changes had been widely criticised for misunderstanding what it takes to run and manage a viable farming business, given the challenges facing rural businesses and the already huge strains put on profitability and cashflow. The CLA have long said that many farms faced ‘being taxed out of existence’ by the new tax rules.
“This announcement will undoubtedly offer some relief to the rural and business owning community. It is good news, but many will say that the ‘watering down’ of the proposals do not go quite far enough. Many businesses will still face a significant (additional) tax burden which stands to have a profound effect on their future viability.
“In light of the forthcoming changes, many farms and estates have been considering and, in many cases, accelerating their succession plans. We are expecting this to continue into the New Year and beyond. Effective planning for farms and businesses remains essential as the full force of these changes begin to be felt from 6 April 2026. Whilst the change isn’t going to be quite as bad as feared, change is still coming.”
COMMENT BY: David Maddock, Partner, Clarke Willmott LLP
“The revised threshold of £2.5 million per individual – or £5 million for spouses and civil partners – is not only a relief, but a recognition of the economic structure of modern farming. Farmland values, essential machinery and necessary diversification assets often push even modest family farms above £1 million in value.
The Government’s updated position reflects a more realistic appreciation of these factors and sharply reduces the number of farms now expected to face additional IHT liabilities.
This is also a policy change that aligns far more closely with the lived experience of the farming families we support at Clarke Willmott. Many were deeply worried about how the original proposals – what some had termed a “family farm tax” – could force rushed succession decisions or farm sales at precisely the wrong time. Increasing the threshold helps protect continuity, stability and the ability of the next generation to farm viably.
However, while this is an important and positive recalibration, it is not a complete resolution. For some larger but still family-run operations, particularly those with high-value land but low annual profit margins, the revised threshold may still present challenges.
Representative groups have rightly pointed out that certain businesses, especially in regions where land is exceptionally expensive, may continue to be drawn into the tax net despite operating on tight margins. The conversation about fairness and sustainability must therefore continue.”
TOPIC: The Government’s position over reversing the Supreme Court ruling in PACCAR in 2023 which resulted in claimants facing uncertainty about whether they can secure funding from third parties in order to bring a civil case against a well-resourced opponent.
COMMENT BY: Jeremy Marshall, Chief Investment Officer, Winward Litigation Finance
“Action to reverse PACCAR is urgent, but the statement from the MOJ suggests that legislation will be combined with light touch regulation. This will certainly and regrettably add further delay to the enactment of legislation and greater uncertainty to the industry and its willingness to fund claims in the UK, which will be music to the ears of well resourced defendants and the US Chamber of Commerce, one of the most powerful organisations in the world lobbying our government on their behalf.”
LEGAL SECTOR APPOINTMENT OF THE YEAR
Dec25 ENTERPRISES
Noel Firtree has been appointed as the new in-house Counsel at Speedy Sleigh & Partners the holy-owned transport subsidiary of Dec25 Enterprises.
In a candid interview with the Legal Diary Chris ‘Santa Claws’ North, the Chair and Chief Executive of Dec25 admitted that this surprise ‘5 minutes to Midnight’ appointment had become necessary due to an alarming realisation that the company was likely to face an avalanche of litigation in the New Year.
“We have just switched to a new AI-driven delivery system,” confessed Chris North, “and I’m afraid it has flummoxed some of our older staff – the ‘elderly elves’ as we call them. Frankly no-one had a clue where any of our deliveries have ended up. Take an address with say, ‘Star’ in it – Star Street, Star Avenue and so on. The AI has just linked them all together. As a result there’s a little-known Starbucks in the village of Star in Somerset which has now got a mountain of Lego parcels outside it. The Starf cannot get in. They are going to sue for sure – as will the disappointed families.”
So Noel Firtree (who trained with the soul practitioner Melchior & Partners) is expecting a busy first week in the job. But having previously been with South West Trains he is familiar with the round-the-clock crisis management. “I’ll be WFHing for most of the year – the commute to Dec25 is just impossible from Summertown in Oxford. But I relish the challenge. It’s always the season of goodwill at Dec25, I gather. It will be like getting all my Christmasses in one go.”
The Legal Diary will continue to track Firtree as he tries to get Speedy Sleigh back on piste.
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