Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Addleshaw Goddard LLP

Addleshaw Goddard LLP

Yorke Eaton and Christopher Noel examine whether the Supreme Court decision in Ilott v The Blue Cross reinforces the principle of testamentary freedom in financial provision cases

On 15 March 2017 the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in Ilott v The Blue Cross [2017]. The case involved a daughter’s long estrangement from her mother, a bitter family feud and a residuary bequest leaving the mother’s estate to charities. The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the charities’ appeal and overturned the previous decision of the Court of Appeal (Ilott v Mitson [2015]), reinstating the judgment at first instance and the award of £50,000 to the claimant (Ilott v Mitson [2014]). The Court of Appeal had substantially increased the award, which had surprised many observers.

Paul Hirst summarises the findings of the Northern Freight and Logistics Report

It has been 18 months since Transport for the North (TfN) published their Northern Transport Strategy report. That report acknowledged that there has never been a single plan for freight and logistics across the North, and TfN promised to develop a Northern multi-modal freight and logistics strategy, to be published in 2016.

Matthew Collingwood-Cooper and Mike Trodden look at the operation of pay less notices in construction contracts

In Harding v Paice [2015], the Court of Appeal revisited the authorities dealing with the consequences of a failure by a paying party to issue a pay less notice in accordance with the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (as amended) (Construction Act). The Court of Appeal’s judgment means that different rules apply depending on whether a payment application is for an interim or a final account.

Matthew Collingwood-Cooper examines a recent judgment of note for parties to adjudication

On 17 June 2015 the Supreme Court gave judgment in the case of Aspect Contracts (Asbestos) Ltd v Higgins Construction plc [2015].

Michael Isaacs looks at how collective consumer claims may work under the enhanced powers given to the FSA in October 2010 by the Financial Services Act 2010

When one thinks of collective action, it brings to mind US-style group claims (class actions) of the Erin Brockovich type, where a large number of injured individuals sue a large company on behalf of the entire injured class. Such cases have rarely been seen in this jurisdiction. However, recent years have seen the rise of significant thematic issues in financial services, and substantial amounts of associated litigation. New FSA powers of collective redress are therefore significant for those in the sector.