Morning round-up

Morning round-up: Thursday 25 January

By on
2

The morning’s top legal affairs news stories

Senior Tories urge government to review joint enterprise laws [The Guardian]

UK sick pay legislation is in breach of EU law [Independent]

FCA dismisses Gina Miller’s threat of Mifid II legal action [Financial News]

Legal operators are the change agents for law [Global Legal Post]

The latest comments from across Legal Cheek

Solicitor plundered £1m from clients to keep firm afloat — with cost to be borne by profession [Legal Futures]

Police chief admits ‘cultural problem’ with evidence disclosure [The Guardian]

Lawyer suing after valet gave the keys to his $300,000 yellow Ferrari to the wrong man [Mail Online]

Leeds student event: Technology and the future of legal practice — with Womble Bond Dickinson [Legal Cheek Hub]

“Accessibility of courts a massive issue. i represented a client who was in a wheelchair (as was her husband) and was extremely difficult getting in and out of court everyday of the five day hearing” [Legal Cheek comments]

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub

2 Comments

Not Amused

Some of the arguments for voting leave were:

1. The EU passes restrictive laws which harm our leading industry (FS) yet do not harm other Member States (because they have almost no FS industries).

2. The UK implements EU more regularly and gets punished for failure to comply more willingly than other Member States – i.e. not all states are held to the same standard.

3. The EU over regulates the UK and as only 5% of businesses do EU trade it is disproportionate that the remaining 95% suffer.

I really don’t see how bringing a court case against the FCA will help the Remain cause. The UK has implemented MiFID 2, even if the FCA is being lenient on individual firms. Many EU Member States have still not implemented MiFID 2 *at all* (see argument 2). The reason the City is having trouble on MiFID 2 is its ridiculous scope (see argument 1) and the fact that so many other EU laws have come in at the same time – GDPR is the biggest impact on UK business, but there are others as well (see argument 3).

All a court case does is bring attention to these arguments. The Remain side in the referendum quite often acted in a way which was detrimental to its own case, seemingly without realising it. The best example of which was to draw colossal amounts of attention to 350m on a bus – because taking a technical point that in fact it is only 276m (or however much) really just makes people think “276m is a lot of money”.

(3)(1)

Anonymous

Just one teeny problem – the bare-faced lie on the side of the bus stated that the NHS would get this figure every single week, so it adds up to billions.

(0)(0)

Comments are closed.

Related Stories