The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
What price justice? Experts or treating clinicians? LB Islington v Al Alas and Wray
Sep 29, 2018, 18:14 PM
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article :
Prioritise In Trending Articles :
Jun 18, 2012, 05:11 AM
Article ID :99173
Jo Delahunty QC 4 Paper Buildings
Kate Purkiss Coram Chambers
In their article, Jo Delahunty QC and Kate Purkiss, who represented Chana Al Alas in the care proceedings in which she and the father were exonerated from having caused the death of their son, explore the obstacles to and then the difficulties surrounding the instruction of experts in cases concerning the TRIAD of injuries (subdural haematoma, encephalopathy and retinal haemorrhages) and question the extent to which it is ever appropriate to rely upon the evidence of treating clinicians in such cases. This issue is likely to be one of huge importance to practitioners with the proposed Family Justice Modernisation Programme aiming to reduce further the need for expert evidence. (See also, 'The vitamin D and rickets case: LB Islington v Al Alas and Wray in June  Fam Law 659 by Jo Delahunty QC and Kate Purkiss.)
To read the rest of this article, see July  Family Law journal.
To log on to Family Law Online or to request a free trial click here