Gatehouse Chambers

𝐏𝐮𝐩𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 15 January 2025, 5:30pm-7:30pm 🏢 Gatehouse Chambers will be hosting a 𝐏𝐮𝐩𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 aimed at aspiring barristers on 15 January 2025. 💡 This event offers a fantastic opportunity for prospective candidates to learn more about life at Gatehouse Chambers, gain valuable insights into our pupillage program, and understand the application process. ✅ Attendees will have the chance to meet members of our team, ask questions about our work and culture, and receive practical advice on how to stand out as an applicant. ✅ Whether you’re considering a career in law or actively preparing to apply, this open evening is a must-attend event to help you take the next step in your journey. 📧 Places are limited. Please email pupillage.application@gatehouselaw.co.uk to register your interest and we will be in touch. #Pupillage #PupilBarrister #PupillageOpenEvening #LegalCareers #LawCareers #Pupils #PupillageGateway

We're looking for an experienced 𝐏𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐫 with approximately 10 years’ experience of working in a practice desk/clerking environment to join our established practice team. 💼 Relevant industry experience in any of our core areas of practice (including property, construction, commercial, insolvency, insurance and professional negligence) would be useful but not essential. What is more important to us is finding the right person, with the skills, experience and determination to succeed. These are fast-paced and challenging roles and central to the support given to barristers, and the service we give to our clients. We are looking for someone who is a team player and who works well under pressure. ⬇️ Learn more about the job below. https://lnkd.in/eqwixVPh #BarristersChambers #Clerking #PracticeManager #Hiring #Vacancy

Sintons, in association with Gatehouse Chambers are delighted to invite you to this Inheritance Act seminar on Thursday 23 January 2025. Register below ⬇️ https://lnkd.in/ep3r55Ph Emma Saunders | Cameron Stocks #SintonsSeminars

𝐌𝐞𝐧𝐳𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐯 𝐎𝐚𝐤𝐰𝐨𝐨𝐝: 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜 𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐲𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬’ 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐬 | Published in Practical Law's Dispute Resolution Column Article by Martyn Griffiths In Menzies v Oakwood Solicitors [2024] UKSC 34, the Supreme Court considered the meaning of payment for the purposes of section 70(4) of the Solicitors Act 1974 (SA 1974). That question has considerable importance because of the limitation periods within SA 1974: 1. Where a client has paid their solicitors’ bill before an application for an assessment is made, they must demonstrate the existence of special circumstances for an assessment to be ordered. 2. Where the bill was paid more than 12 months before the application is made, the court has no jurisdiction to conduct an assessment under the SA 1974. Find out more⬇️ https://lnkd.in/e3F5pDX2 #MenziesvOakwood #SolicitorsAct1974 #UKSC #SupremeCourt

𝐃𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬' 𝐝𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐇𝐒 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 | Published in FIRE Magazine By Aileen McErlean In March 2015, BHS was sold for to Retail Acquisition Limited for the princely sum of just £1. Dominic Chappell (a thrice bankrupt former racing driver with no experience in retail) and his fellow directors took the helm of the struggling group. A little over a year later, in April 2016, BHS collapsed into administration and later insolvent liquidation by which point the net deficiency was a staggering £1.3 billion). The BHS cases raise a number of issues: 1. Have the lines between wrongful trading and breach of the creditor duty been impermissibly blurred? 2. Is “misfeasant trading” a new cause of action? 3. Is the outcome incompatible with fostering a “rescue culture”? Find out more⬇️ https://lnkd.in/d-9ss6_J #FIRE #Insolvency #BHScollapse #bankruptcy ThoughtLeaders4 FIRE | TL4FIRE

The Supreme Court this morning handed down the much anticipated judgment in 𝑯𝒊𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒗 𝑯𝒊𝒓𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒅 [2024] UKSC 43. 💷 The decision provides welcome clarification that success fees due under a conditional fee agreement (“CFA”) are not recoverable as part of a substantive award for reasonable financial provision made under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (the “1975 Act”) as a consequence of s58A(6) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. The Court of Appeal had previously decided that a success fee which was otherwise irrecoverable by virtue of s58A(6) was capable of being a debt, the satisfaction of which could be a financial need for which the Court may make provision as part of a substantive award under the 1975 Act. ⚖️ In the Supreme Court, the Appellant argued that a substantive award under the 1975 Act could not circumvent the clear policy reasons which led to the introduction of s58A(6) and the prohibition on the recovery of success fees from opposing parties. In addition, it was argued that the inclusion of a success fee within a substantive award was incompatible with the civil costs regime contained in the CPR which left costs to be determined following a substantive determination when the Court could be made aware of the parties’ respective without prejudice positions. 📜 The Supreme Court (Lord Richards, whom Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Leggatt, Lord Burrows and Lord Stephens agreed) unanimously allowed the appeal holding that whilst claims under the 1975 Act remain subject to the CPR, costs of the proceedings are treated separately from the substantive relief and a substantive award may not include provision for either a success fee due under a CFA or a party’s base legal costs. ✨ Brie Stevens-Hoare KC and Cameron Stocks acted for the successful appellant (alongside Oliver Ingham at 3PB Barristers) instructed by Martin Oliver, Katie Alsop and Danielle Pawson at Wright Hassall LLP. 🔗 A copy of the judgment can be found here: https://lnkd.in/eJ66XS2V #SupremeCourt #CFA #Hirachand #1975Act #ConditionalFeeAgreement #InheritanceAct #LegalCosts #SuccessFees #InheritanceLaw #CourtofAppeal #CourtDecision #LegalUpdate #Litigation #CivilProcedure #LegalInsight #Barristers #LegalNews #LitigationFriend

📢 𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫: December 2024 Gatehouse Chambers' Insolvency Newsletter is now live. Below you will find an insightful article by Mark O'Grady, and Ryan Hocking has kindly provided a round up of developments in the law, as well as an insight into what we have all been up to. We wish you all a very merry festive period and a successful and prosperous new year! Editor - Katrina Mather Find out more⬇️ https://lnkd.in/eX9vSPYc #News #Legalnews #Insolvency #Insolvencylaw #Legalupdate

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐚𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝑺𝒌𝒚 𝑼𝑲 𝑳𝒊𝒎𝒊𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑴𝒂𝒄𝒆 𝑳𝒊𝒎𝒊𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝒗 𝑹𝒊𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝑴𝒂𝒏𝒂𝒈𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑨𝒈𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒚 𝑳𝒊𝒎𝒊𝒕𝒆𝒅 & 𝑶𝒓𝒔 [2024] 𝑬𝑾𝑪𝑨 𝑪𝒊𝒗 1567   Paul Reed KC, Ebony Alleyne, and James Shaw succeeded on behalf of Mace, in a landmark judgment on a number of foundational and commercially significant issues in insurance law.    The Court of Appeal (Popplewell, Snowden, Phillips LJJ) unanimously upheld Mace and Sky’s appeals and dismissed all of the Insurers’ cross-appeals. The judgment deals with a number of major issues, including the meaning of ‘damage’, recovery for deteriorating and developing damage in time-limited occurrence policies, ‘any one event’ aggregation wording and cover for investigation costs. Read the full judgment here: https://lnkd.in/encnrTXR. A summary is provided here: https://lnkd.in/ebmQbpXW. Paul, Ebony and James were instructed by Richard Moody, Bryn Hodges, Celia Lewis, and Guy Davies of Clyde & Co LLP. #insurance #construction #allrisks #commerciallitigation #propertyinsurance #damage #courtofappeal #caselaw #constructionallrisks

Leading firm Adam Benedict and Michael Levenstein (Gatehouse Chambers) have secured a resounding victory for their clients, 381 Southwark Park Road RTM Company Limited and various claimant leaseholders, against a major rooftop developer, “Click”, operating as the Click Group of Companies. ⚖️ The judgment is of historical importance because Click’s various breaches gave rise to the first ever High Court finding of a “relevant liability” under s130 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (which concerns the High Court’s ability to make Building Liability Orders against a body corporate) as a result of a “building safety risk”. The ruling confirms that findings of liability for building safety can potentially extend beyond the original developer to include associated companies. In short, if a developer uses a subsidiary or special purpose vehicle (SPV) for a project, liability for any defects may still be transferred to other companies within the same corporate group. This case is likely to be of further significance because the claimants have applied for a Building Liability Order to be made against one or more associated companies within the “Click” corporate group, including the parent company, Click Group Holdings Limited. If successful, this is expected to be the first time such a remedy will have been granted by the High Court since the new statutory regime was enacted following Grenfell. 🏗️ This finding and the potential making of a Building Liability Order in this case will be of significant concern to those in the construction industry (and their professional advisers), as the High Court is able to hold developers and associated companies to account for building safety, and they will not be able to avoid liability simply by dissolving the subsidiary/SPV responsible for the relevant construction project. 🏘️ Equally, it will also be seen as a major victory for leaseholders and regulators, as the increased accountability will encourage better compliance with safety standards, and will improve claimants’ chances of claiming compensation. In this case, the claimants have been awarded approximately £1.2 million (representing the vast majority of their claim value), with further amounts sought (including legal costs) at a subsequent hearing in the near future. At that hearing, it is expected that Jefford J will address the claimants’ application for a Building Liability Order and, it is hoped, will help establish a framework within which the High Court may handle similar claims that will lead to more consistent and predicable outcomes for aggrieved parties in future. The Adam Benedict team consisted of: ✨ Adam Creasey, Managing Director ✨ Grace Jenkins, Associate ✨ Harrison Carr, Trainee Solicitor 🔗 A link to the judgment can be found in the National Archives here: https://lnkd.in/ezqVvB9k #BuildingSafety #ConstructionLaw #BuildingSafetyAct #LeaseholdersRights #ConstructionIndustry #BuildingLiabilityOrder #ConstructionLitigation

We are thrilled to report that Laura Tweedy won Newcomer of the Year at the National Mediation Awards last night. Laura is known as a results driven, pragmatic and methodical mediator, she is willing to mediate any dispute although she has particular interest and experience in property and private client related issues. She is particularly known for her ability to deal with highly contentious, emotionally fraught disputes. Huge congratulations to Laura! Learn more about Laura's expertise ⬇️ https://lnkd.in/eMnXFzXp #Mediation #NationalMediationAwards #Law #Legal