Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
Where do US female lawyers get their education? Below, Enjuris has collated a number of statistics on US law schools, female, enrollments and more. The New York Times recently reported that women form less than 20% of partner positions at top US law firms. It also reported that although more women were being enroled in law schools, they were generally being educated at lower ranking schools than male law students.
While female representation doesn't cover the majority of students, stats indicate it is none the less growing in the US's top-ranked law schools.
In addition between 2016 and 2017, female legal enrollment increased, though not dramatically. More data on the below enrolment comparisons can be found here. The below highlighted in blue are schools that increased enrollment of female law students in 2017, while the rest either kept their figures the same or decreased their female enrolments.
Following the death of Charlie Gard last year from a rare genetic illness, Charlie’s parents are pressing for ‘Charlie’s Law’ to be introduced. Rebecca Fitzpatrick, partner and specialist in health law at Browne Jacobson, discusses its legal implications with Lawyer Monthly.
The Charlie Gard case was a best interests case in 2017, involving an infant boy born with a rare incurable genetic disorder that causes progressive brain damage and muscle failure. The case became controversial because the medical team and parents disagreed about whether experimental treatment was in the best interests of the child, and so an application was made to the High Court to decide what was in Charlie’s best interests. The court agreed with the view put forward by the clinical team, and made an order that it was not in Charlie’s best interests to undergo the experimental treatment. Subsequent appeals failed, and Charlie died shortly afterwards. The case attracted huge international media and social media attention, with even President Trump and the Vatican becoming involved.
Following the case, Charlie’s parents have campaigned for a new “Charlie’s Law” to be introduced. One aspect of this is for there to be a requirement that the parties try to resolve disagreements as early as possible by way of independent mediation, before applying to the court. In his judgment, Mr Justice Francis said he recognised that ‘negotiating issues such as the life or death of a child seems impossible and often will be’, but he believed it should be attempted in all cases, even if all it achieved was a greater understanding between the parties.
What does mediation entail and what are the current laws around it in these cases?
Medical Mediation attempts to resolve conflicts in the medical setting through the use of an impartial third party.
This can involve health professionals and families who cannot agree on treatment options for family members, or other conflicts, such as communication breakdown and end of life care.
At the present time, mediation is not a formal requirement in disputes concerning the medical care of children or incapacitated adults and although it is encouraged, public funding is not available for such mediation.
What would the legal implications be on other cases if it was introduced? For example could it impact on the law around incapable adults?
Recent pilots in cases concerning adults have indicated that mediation can lead to a significant number of cases resolving, thereby obviating the need for a formal application to court, which has to be welcomed. However, cases involving babies in a palliative care situation, where parents disagree with the treatment plan, are among the most difficult to resolve in my experience.
In my view, it would be sensible to have a more formal arrangement, so mediation can be offered early on in these disputes, with funding for families so they can seek advice in preparing for mediation. Trying to get each party to really listen to the other and agree a way through can be very effective. Even if the case still goes to court, it can help to narrow the issues.
The effect of such high-profile cases on the medics, families and trust involved and the role of social media and how this can be managed?
Over 25 years in practice, I have seen these cases from all sides. I initially represented families but, for the last 13 years, I have represented NHS providers – trusts, private hospitals and clinical commissioning groups. My cases have included representing an Orthodox Jewish family with a dying baby and seeing first-hand what an impossible situation it was and how tortuous it was for them. But more recently, I have also seen how these cases deeply affect the clinical team.
One of the biggest issues in both the Charlie Gard and the Alfie Evans cases was the impact of social media. These cases were immensely high profile, and the extent of social media attention caused huge distress to the doctors, hospital staff and other patients affected. The Court of Appeal in Evans expressed “dismay and concern….we were told that some members of the hospital staff could not get to the hospital because of road blockages ……hospitals must be places which provide peace and calm. What we have been told occurred is the very opposite.”
My personal view is that it would be better for these very contentious cases to be heard in private, or in public on an anonymous basis, at least initially, so the child and the trust are not named until the case is concluded. The cases would still receive a lot of coverage, but there wouldn’t be this social media minefield. Therefore, it is vital that the Trust involved seeks early legal advice so that, where appropriate, an application can be made of an anonymity order.
But, in these high-profile cases, the problem is our legal system hasn’t caught up with how to manage social media. Once in the public domain, it will usually not be possible to obtain an anonymity order. In such cases, it is very important for Trusts to make sure there is a balanced picture of the case publicly available, so that the public can see its full context. Whilst there may be a need to seek advice on confidentiality issues, it will usually be possible to redress the balance somewhat by, for example, highlighting key aspects of the evidence before the court that have been highlighted in a published judgment.
It will also be important for the Trust to ensure appropriate support is provided to staff and families affected, including protection from harassment, abuse or defamation.
Maintaining an active social media presence for your law firm is critical to the success of both your website and your firm as a whole. Before potential clients give your office a call, they’ll likely check out your Facebook and Twitter profiles.
Facebook alone has over 1 billion active profiles. Combine that with the number of users on other popular social media sites like Instagram, Twitter, Pinterest, Google Plus, and LinkedIn, and you have a real opportunity to get your law firm out there and engaging with potential clients.
Although Google has made it clear on several occasions that being active on social media doesn’t affect how your website ranks in Google searches, there is no denying that a strong social media strategy can indirectly benefit your search engine optimization (SEO) efforts.
Below, Tom Desmond, Co-Founder of law firm SEO company ApricotLaw, looks at five ways you can optimize your law firm’s social media strategy to bolster your SEO efforts.
1. Be Active
Social media gives you the opportunity to provide relevant content to your target audience without them having to search for it on Google first. When a potential client is interested in content from your website that you’ve posted on your firm’s Facebook or Twitter profile, he or she will click through and visit your site.
The person who clicks a link to your site on social media is likely to already be interested in your services or the information on your law firm’s website. That means he or she is likely to click further links after landing on your site. This will help lower your bounce rate, or the number of website visitors that leave the site after viewing just one page while increasing your long clicks. Long clicks refer to the length of time someone stays on your website’s page.
Both bounce rate and long clicks are ranking factors for Google.
But simply having a social media profile isn’t enough. It’s important that you are active and engaged with other profiles and your audience. The more active and engaged you are, the more popular your social media pages will likely be.
2. Target Content Creators
The popularity of social media makes it easier than ever to get your content in front of a large, diverse audience. When you post content on social media that catches the attention of influential content creators, such as journalists and bloggers who browse social media for article or video ideas, these content creators may be inspired to create content that relates to your firm’s practice area.
If they do that, they’re likely to link back to your site from their own content on their own sites. That means you’ve just generated a high-quality backlink.
One critical component of SEO for attorneys is getting backlinks. This is when another website links back to your website. Google considers pages with high-quality backlinks more authoritative than sites without them and ranks them higher for key search terms.
3. Create Interesting Videos
Want to catch the attention of both Google and potential clients? Create videos. With few exceptions, videos get more engagement from social media audiences than other content types. What’s more, Google likes websites that include videos, so when you create a video about your practice areas or some other important information, publish it on your website and share that page on social media.
That way, you get a double-edged benefit: You get a nice little ranking boost from having videos on your site, and your law firm’s social media profiles get higher engagement.
If you upload a video directly to your Facebook, Twitter, or other social media profile, include in the post a link back to your site and indicate that your site has more videos and information. That’s yet another way to get highly engaged visitors on your site, which Google loves to see.
4. Optimize Your Social Media Profiles
Try this out: Type “Ben & Jerry’s” into Google. What are the top few results? You likely see the main website for the ice cream company, followed closely by the company’s Twitter profile and Facebook page — possibly even the corporate Instagram page.
What don’t you see? Results for other ice cream companies. That’s because Ben & Jerry’s has an active social media presence and complete social media profiles, allowing the company to dominate search engine results pages (SERPs) for terms that include the company name (branded searches).
You can apply this to your law firm. By including your website, business name, and other relevant content in the description area of your social media profiles, you can increase your odds of ranking in the top several spots for branded searches. That means more chances for searchers to engage with your firm and a way to push your competition farther down in the SERPs.
5. Consider Other Search Engines
Hearing SEO experts talk, you’d think Google was the only search engine out there. It may dominate the market, but Google isn’t the only search engine by any means.
If even 10 percent of Internet searchers use a search engine other than Google, that represents an enormous number of people. You wouldn’t turn down a potential client at your law firm because he or she doesn’t use Google, and you don’t want to miss out when those using other search engines are looking for attorneys in your location and practice area.
While Google has steadily maintained that it doesn’t allow social media activity to directly influence rankings for a private website, other search engines haven’t been so rigid. Bing has confirmed on at least one occasion that it does examine the “social authority” of websites and that the metric does have a positive effect on search results.
In other words, an active social media presence may only provide indirect SEO benefits when it comes to Google, but it may directly affect your rankings on any number of other search engines.
Social Media and SEO for Attorneys
Social media is an important part of any internet marketing campaign. In addition to giving your firm credibility and proving to potential clients that you’re “real” and an authority in your practice area and location, an active social media presence can provide indirect benefits to your SEO efforts.
Lawyer SEO is a crowded, competitive field. No potential advantage should be ignored, and that includes social media.
Those of us in private client practice will no doubt have come across the scenario of Attorneys, acting under a Lasting or Enduring Power of Attorney, misusing Donor’s money. More often than not they have a reasonable explanation; usually that they didn’t realise what they were doing was wrong or had not understood the boundaries of their authority. This week Lawyer Monthly hears from Amy Chater, Solicitor, Vulnerable People and Court of Protection at Coffin Mew, on the difficult situations that can arise from gift approvals.
However, to quote Senior Judge Lush, ignorance is no excuse; when Attorneys sign up to the documents they confirm they will abide by the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 rules and code of practice, some of which are detailed in the documents themselves or at least referred to.
Under an Enduring Power of Attorney (EPA), the Attorney has power to “do on behalf of the donor anything which the donor could lawfully do by an attorney at the time when the donor executed the instrument” (para 3(1) Schedule 4 MCA 2005).
This power is restricted though, in that gifts can only be given by the Attorney on the donor’s behalf for customary occasions i.e. a birthday, marriage, birth of a child, and must be a reasonable amount having regard to the circumstances and the size of the donor’s estate. The Attorney is also able to provide for another’s needs, if the donor would be expected to support them, providing there is no conflict of interest. If there is potential conflict than court approval should be sought.
An important point to note is that Attorneys shouldn’t benefit from their position or put themselves in a position which might conflict with their duties.
A recent Court of Protection case looked at this particularly complex area. The judge, HHJ Vincent, considered an application to retrospectively approve gifts of money made by an Attorney from the donor’s bank account to and for the benefit of himself, totalling just over £100,000 over a period of six years. In this scenario, the Applicant (the Attorney) had been acting under his 95-year-old father’s EPA to manage his finances as his father, the Donor, had Alzheimer’s disease and lacked capacity to deal with his own financial affairs. Of the payments, circa £88,000 were in respect of care and circa £17,000 for gifts to himself and the family.
The Application was made at the request of the Office of the Public Guardian and was opposed by the Applicant’s older brother, with whom he was understood to have had a fraught relationship. The Applicant was also requesting relief from any liability he may have incurred in making or receiving the gifts.
The Applicant’s evidence highlighted that it had been an emotional and difficult time. Whilst he admitted he didn’t know what his role or responsibilities were as an Attorney, he also admitted he was not good with money and had found acting as his father’s Attorney extremely stressful and hard on the whole family. Over the years he had been caring for his father, it had been at the expense of his own family, he said, who he had to leave in Ireland to come over to England to stay with his father for long periods of time. He accepted that he had benefitted financially from his father throughout his life and gave the impression that he continued to feel this entitlement so had, in effect, treated his father’s bank accounts as his own. It was agreed that a professional Deputy should be appointed.
The court has the power to approve payments under s16 and s18(1)(b) MCA 2005. In considering each of the gifts and whether they should be approved, the best interest test was applied; 'an act done, or decision made, under this Act for or on behalf of a person who lacks capacity must be done, or made, in his best interests' s1(5)MCA 2005.
HHJ Vincent first looked at the £88,000, which was largely the Applicant paying himself a wage for caring for his father. Fortunately, the Office of the Public Guardian had recently published guidance on care payments within a family and these were considered, as well as the best interest test, and the conclusion was that approximately £15,000 was disallowed. Discussion took place over the way in which both the Applicant’s father, and mother, managed their finances prior to losing capacity. The judge was, in part, influenced by evidence given by both brothers confirming that there was a relatively relaxed approach to money and that their sons had been told that they should ensure that they were not ‘left short’. This was further evidenced by a letter of wishes in their father’s Will, which supported their wish to equalise any gifts made during their lifetime.
The gifts of approximately £17,000, which included items such as a laptop, art supplies and a speeding fine, were included within the other payments made to the Applicant and were largely approved, as were gifts totalling a similar amount paid to the Respondent brother - it was acknowledged that the donor (and his late wife) would have wanted an equal split between the two sons.
Of the unapproved sums, the judge was clear to point out the Court has no power to order the Applicant to repay them. It was noted that, whilst the professional Deputy could bring separate proceedings for repayment, there was little point as he couldn’t afford to pay it, and it would be further money out of the Donor’s assets, with the costs of the application also reducing the pot further. Instead, recommendation was made that the unapproved sums should be taken from the Applicant’s share of the residuary estate on his father’s death. The professional Deputy tasked with this case will need to review the father’s Will before considering whether a statutory will application will be required.
This case highlights the difficulties that can arise when taking on the role of Attorney or Deputy. The judgement shows the application of the best interest test and, in particular, the need to consider the donor’s past wishes and feelings.
On the back of recent EU statements regarding anti money laundering practices throughout member states, leading economist and former Governor of the Central Bank of Cyprus, Professor Panicos Demetriades, discusses the overall vulnerability of the EU’s financial system and where the risks lie in the responsibilities given to member states.
The recent announcement by the European Banking Authority (EBA) that it found “general and systematic shortcomings” in Malta’s application of anti-money-laundering (AML) rules has exposed yet another weakness in the euro area’s financial architecture.
So far, the debate on the completion of the banking union has focused almost exclusively on the completion of its third pillar – deposit insurance. That is because it is widely believed that the first and second pillars – banking supervision and banking resolution – have already been completed with the creation of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) and the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM).
SSM, in fact, has the authority to supervise all banks in the euro area. There is, however, one exception: supervision of AML. That has remained in the hands of member states, partly as a result of political objections based on national security considerations. AML supervision can, therefore, vary widely within the euro area and, as the Maltese case has shown, can fall well below expected standards.
“So what?” you might ask. Surely indiscretions in a small country like Malta wouldn’t matter all that much?
Or would they? The notion that such indiscretions do not matter can be easily refuted by looking at what happened in the case of ABLV bank, the third largest bank in Latvia that failed because of actions taken by the US Treasury arising out of money laundering “concerns”. Daniele Nouy, chair of SSM admitted that the ABLV affair was “embarrassing” for the ECB and was quick to call for EU-level authorities to be given AML powers.
Reputational considerations are of course very important, more so for relatively young central banks like the ECB on whose reputation the future of the euro rests.
But the Latvian case demonstrated several deeper flaws in the euro’s financial architecture. First, that Europe cannot rely on the US for actions against money laundering, not just because US intelligence may not always get it right but also because such actions may reflect US political biases. Second, it has also demonstrated that AML failures can have implications for financial stability, banking supervision and bank resolution – all of which are key elements of the banking union. Combine the two together and it’s like handing over financial stability in the euro area to the US.
Last but not least, the Latvian case has demonstrated that even the national security objection to centralizing AML may be seriously flawed, especially if the biggest security threats to the euro area are common. Indeed, the ABLV affair suggests they might be, as the money laundering “concerns” were linked to Russian deposits. Assuming the US Treasury “concerns” about ABLV were valid, they suggest that the Latvian AML supervisor failed, even though Latvia is a country that is acutely aware of the security threat from the East.
Regulators in small member states with large banking systems are, in fact, vulnerable to capture by powerful financial interests, as are the media and the political process. The story of the Cyprus crisis is a case in point, and it is also linked to the same threat from the East.
During 2005-11 the Cypriot banking system doubled in size, largely because of the influx of Russian and Ukrainian deposits, facilitated by politically connected law firms. The abundant liquidity in Cypriot banks resulted in a credit boom and a real estate bubble, as well as reckless investments outside Cyprus (e.g. the purchase of Greek Government bonds and a top-ten retail bank in Russia).
Part of the problem was that the “ruling elite” of Cyprus became dependent on Russian and Ukrainian money and resisted any attempt at tightening regulation. When the banks suffered massive losses from their bond and loan portfolio, Cyprus was forced to apply for financial assistance from Europe and the IMF.
As part of that, the country undertook – reluctantly - a major restructuring of its banking system. The restructuring programme addressed nominally the regulatory failings that led to the crisis and included an apparent tightening of the AML framework and supervision. But the programme has not addressed the deeper cause of the crisis: state capture by a ruling elite content to accumulate wealth by continuing to serve the needs of Russia and its oligarchs. The restructuring, in fact, resulted in toxic political fallout that eroded the central bank’s independence. In the second half of 2013, notwithstanding an ECB legal opinion advising to the contrary, legislative changes were enacted that shifted powers away from the Governor, whose independence is protected by the Treaty, onto the Board of Directors that can be subject to political influence. Russian influence on Cyprus, has, if anything, increased since 2014 and the effectiveness of AML supervision remains doubtful.
Why this can be problematic for Europe – and indeed the United States - is illustrated by what is perhaps the most infamous case of money-laundering to date: that of Paul Manafort, former campaign manager of Donald Trump, who used Laiki, the second largest bank in Cyprus, to launder millions of dollars from his work advising Ukraine’s former pro-Russian President Victor Yanukovych.
Manafort has been indicted as part of the Mueller investigation into possible Russian influence in the American presidential election not only for money laundering but also for acting as an “unregistered agent of a foreign country”. While Cyprus can proudly point to the fact that Manafort’s bank account was closed in 2013 because of suspected money laundering, the indictment makes reference to two “loan” transactions from Cyprus in 2014 and 2015 totalling $1.9 million. These large transactions, which are unlikely to go under the AML radar of any well supervised bank, cast considerable doubt on the effectiveness of AML supervision by Cyprus, notwithstanding the improvements promoted in 2013-14.
By contrast, Cyprus took firm and decisive action against a small but fiercely competitive branch of a foreign bank in summer 2014, following a preliminary US Treasury finding that the bank was of “primary money laundering concern”. The bank, however, had nothing to do with the Manafort affair and indeed no evidence was ever provided by the US Treasury to substantiate its “concerns”. The bank’s Lebanese owners claim that they have been scapegoated – they believe their bank may have been a “sacrificial lamb” to convince the outside world that Cyprus is taking drastic action to tackle money laundering. Rulings by Cypriot Courts have certainly gone against the action of the central bank. Specifically, the District Court has found that “the special liquidation of FBME [proposed by the central bank] was not proven to be in the public interest”, a ruling also upheld more recently by Cyprus’ Supreme Court.
While AML supervision remains in the hands of national member states, the euro remains vulnerable to threats from the East and erratic behavior from the West. Small states with large banking systems like Cyprus, Malta, and Latvia are particularly vulnerable as they are susceptible to state capture by powerful financial interests. The ECB cannot rely on the effectiveness of national supervisors to safeguard the integrity, stability and reputation of the euro area from these threats.
Sources: https://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/10180/2257858/Recommendation+to+the+FIAU+on+action+necessary+to+comply+with+the+AML+directive+%28EBA-Rec-2018-02%29.pdf https://www.politico.eu/pro/ecb-rejects-criticism-over-latvian-money-laundering-scandal/?utm_source=Bruegel+Updates&utm_campaign=c867b01dae-Blogs+review+10%2F01%2F18&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_eb026b984a-c867b01dae-278552761 https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-ablvbank-sanctions/u-s-proposes-sanctions-on-the-latvian-ablv-bank-over-money-laundering-concerns-idUKKCN1FX31M https://www.justice.gov/file/1038391/download
In terms of talent, assets and market capitalization, there are currently only three cities on Earth right now that could legitimately lay claim to being a global financial capital; New York, London and Tokyo. Combined, these three make up a significant chunk of all global trading and capital flows, and have been respectively dubbed the three "command centres of the world economy".
With the ancient City of London having played a leading role in global finance for hundreds of years, New York's Wall Street continuing to exert influence on every corner of the globe, and Tokyo's Marunouchi district being the epicentre of Asian capital flows, it's hard to see these places losing prime position any time soon. However, the sands are indeed shifting, and cities that have long had considerable financial clout on the world stage are moving up the rankings, and could very likely dislodge the Big Three before the next decade is over. Here are three emerging financial centres to watch out for in 2019.
Shanghai
Source: Pixabay
Even the most passive observer of global affairs will have witnessed the not-so-gradual shifting of the global centre of gravity towards East Asia over the past decade. China is set to become the world's largest and most powerful economy by 2050, and the booming cosmopolitan city of Shanghai already dominates China's increasingly open financial sector, with the capital Beijing trailing far, far behind. Much of the financial sector is centred around the sprawling Pudong district of Shanghai, where you'll find such icons as the Oriental Pearl Tower and the Shanghai Tower, Asia's tallest building and home to Alibaba, one of the world's largest retail and technology giants. Shanghai is fast rising through the ranks and it is already vying with Hong Kong for supremacy in the region.
Frankfurt
Source: Picabay
Frankfurt, perched on the River Main, and known locally as "Bankfurt" for pretty obvious reasons and "Mainhattan" due to the skyscrapers which crowd the financial district, is already home to the European Central Bank (ECB) and, of course, Deutsche Bank, one of the largest financial institutions on the planet. Frankfurt has always been a magnet for global finance and, like London, is well-located for those looking to trade forex on the global market, given how it overlaps with many other timezones. It is generally known for little else other than that, having long suffered from an undeserved reputation for being a dull city. Out of all other major EU cities, Frankfurt looks set to benefit the most from the mass relocation of financial bodies after Brexit, a boost which could catapult the German city into the top ranks.
Dublin
Source: Pixabay
Much like our previous entrant, Dublin has much to gain from London's loss. The Irish capital is already on a winning streak having risen through the ranks considerably in recent years but, thanks to a shared language and long-standing links with British and American financial companies, Dublin is set for a massive windfall in the years ahead. Beyond this, low taxes (apart from a 20% bonus cap which might deter many bankers) and a high quality of life also make the city a magnet for financial elites.
The Big Three have been the epicentres of global finance for the past century but, with New York suffering from American trade wars, Tokyo sliding down the rankings due to stagnation, and London staring down the barrel of Brexit, a lot of change lies ahead.
With Brexit looming, recent promotional activity from the continent is indicating that some of the UK’s £25bn legal industry could be lured overseas. Craig Arnott, Managing Director at Burford Capital, explains the complexities of Brexit and the legal industry below.
In part this is driven by uncertainty surrounding the UK’s jurisdiction in Europe under the Brussels I Regulation. Other European courts have in response begun adopting UK legal practices, offering proceedings in English and opening international courts in an attempt to attract the UK’s lucrative legal trade.
Frankfurt, Paris, Amsterdam and Brussels are all jurisdictions that have received a boost from the Brexit decision, and have begun to make their own legal systems more attractive to the type of litigation that previously would have been pursued in London without a second thought.
This is not all bad news for providers of litigation finance, even those based in the UK, because they can be agnostic about the geography and forum of litigation so long as there is a robust and predictable judicial system.
Further, the shift in dispute resolution work from London to Europe after Brexit is happening for other reasons as well. Costs, or more specifically adverse costs, particularly for competition and class action-style cases with multiple, deep-pocketed corporate defendants are making more and more claimants look to the continent. With international competition intensifying, the UK faces a considerable challenge from the issue of adverse costs exposure.
This is because while it is one thing to not win damages in your case, it is an entirely different matter to have to pay the other side’s costs as well, as it can multiply potential exposure from litigation three, four or five-fold.
The adverse costs risk in the UK commercial courts has far outstripped inflationary increases in the last ten years. In the RBS Rights Issue litigation, RBS’s costs estimate for the liability phase was £90 million, and whilst that is a truly exceptional number, £5 million for the costs of a defendant to trial is by no means unusual.
If you consider a case where there are multiple defendants (either at the claimant’s choice or added in under the Part 20 procedure), the exposure is similarly multiplied, meaning potential adverse costs in a cartel or competition matter could easily hit £20 million.
To remain ahead, London therefore must develop strategies to address costs concerns for would-be claimants – and external financing offers one potential solution. Burford recently announced an offering designed to meet a need in the marketplace for the significant level of adverse costs coverage that is required to protect claimants’ exposure in the UK. To address adverse costs risk in commercial litigation and arbitration, Burford can offer insurance on Burford-funded matters.
Legal finance can offer relief from this extraordinary exposure insofar as a third party assumes the downside risk in the event of a commercial litigation loss. However, it takes a very well capitalised litigation finance business with significant risk tolerance to handle this degree of risk and also provide cover for costs, meaning claimants will have to do their homework before going ahead.
The UK’s legal industry must be a key component to be secured whatever the outcome of negotiations with the European Union. It cannot rest on its laurels and must continue to adopt the changes and innovations necessary to keep British law at the forefront of the legal world. Only in this way can the UK remain at the forefront of the international legal world and continue to attract global litigation and arbitration.
What happens when you accidentally log into an email or social media account that’s not yours, as two thirds (62%) of us have? Well, 90% of us admit we don’t immediately log out.
The study, by Manchester security and surveillance firm Online Spy Shop also revealed that half who stayed logged in performed at least one action in the account!
What’s more, some 22% admitted to deliberately trying to access partner’s social media at least once - and one in three of those guessed the right password, with Facebook being the social media account most likely to be hacked by a partner.
Excuses for this ‘ethical snooping’ included investigating infidelity, helping someone to make a surprise marriage proposal, tracking down a missing person and being asked by a significant other to check messages.
Out of the Britons who accidentally hacked their partner’s social media account, either by logging in on a shared computer or finding the account already logged in, only 12% immediately realised their mistake and logged out.
A dishonest 22% admit to deliberately trying to access their partner’s social media accounts.
What’s the first thing accidental hackers do when they’re in their partner’s social media account?
| Looked at inbox | 31% |
| Checked notifications | 26% |
| Opened a message | 24% |
| Posted from the account | 15% |
| Copied or forwarded a message | 4% |
Facebook is the social media platform most likely to be accidentally hacked, with 76% of those who admitted accessing someone else’s social media, either deliberately or by accident, saying they did it on this.
Ethical snooping - Case studies:
Eli Zheleva, 28 from Portsmouth used a browser vulnerability to hack her friend’s email, and reset her social media passwords to find her location after she went missing.
“A friend of mine went missing. Her housemate called me to let me know she's stormed off. Later on, he found a rather negative note buried under other paperwork on her desk. It wasn't suicidal as such, but it had lines such as "I don't want to live amongst people who'd rather I was not alive.”
“We didn't know where she was and she had left her phone at the house, thus we couldn't contact her, all we knew is that she'd had some alcohol to drink and then drove off, which worried us even more.
“She was supposed to take a flight to Bulgaria a week later and we were wondering if she'd rebooked her flight to leave earlier. We were desperate to discover her location.
"I used a trick I’d read about on a popular tech website that enables you to decrypt passwords that have been saved in a browser. This enabled me to get into her email to get the new password to access her Facebook to see if she’d contacted anyone. Once I was in her email, I was also able to see if she’d had any confirmations from the airline about changing her flight. We were then able to tell the police that she was probably still in the country, as our biggest concern was that she’d gone to Bulgaria.
“Thankfully she did turn up safe and well. The moral of the story is never to use the same passwords for different accounts. It was worryingly easy to get into her email account."
Rebecca Williams, a chef from Yorkshire is a prolific ‘honest hacker’, having accessed her brother’s Facebook account and the account of his ex-girlfriend, without either knowing at the time.
“I logged into my brother’s Facebook account while he was on a plane to New York. He was planning a surprise proposal and one of his friends posted something on his wall that would have given the game away. I used his laptop and logged into his Facebook as his browser had saved his login details. Then I deleted the post. He was glad I did it when he found out.
“I also used Facebook to discover that his ex had been unfaithful. He’d said he was suspicious, so I went and found out. I guessed her password first time as it was very predictable. Then read her messages and saw what she’d been up to. He ended the relationship with her but didn’t tell her how he knew.”
Dale Davies, a digital marketing manager from Edinburgh, has an ‘open social media relationship’ with his girlfriend.
“I log in to my partner’s social media all the time. I post things on her behalf and check her messages, at her request. I don’t feel weird and I’ve never seen anything private or sensitive.”
Steve Roberts, a former close protection and surveillance operative who now runs Online Spy Shop, believes Britain has a big issue when it comes to protecting and respecting digital privacy.
“It’s so easy to leave yourself open to invasions of privacy. Either by leaving yourself logged in, or just by allowing your browser to save your password. You become reliant on the honesty of others to protect your privacy.
"It’s shocking to think that only 1 in 10 of us can resist the temptation to log out right away when we find ourselves looking at someone else’s private information, but it’s even more shocking that some people think it’s OK to breach another person’s online privacy because the ends justify the means."
(Source: Online Spy Shop)
According to attorney Scott Monge, Founder of Monge & Associates and author of “Secrets to Win Your Injury Case,” here’s how you can prevent sabotaging your case.
If you’ve been injured in an accident that was not your fault, you should feel confident heading into your case that you’ll receive all the compensation you’re entitled to. After all, it’s you and your family who have been paying the price physically, emotionally, and financially. Your world has been turned upside down and the outcome of your injury case is crucial for your future.
But besides hiring a highly rated law firm to represent you, it is also up to you to make sure you don’t sabotage your own injury case.
It’s no secret that insurance companies are in business to make money. It’s important to keep in mind that they are more concerned with their own interests than yours. The insurance adjuster of the at-fault party might be friendly and seem helpful, but understand that their loyalty lies with the insurance company they’re employed by.
As nations focus upon the ongoing issue of illegal human immigrants, such as the Trump administration’s focus upon the Mexican border, is the real issue at hand the ongoing unmeasurable cross-border pollution which effects nations worldwide? Below experts at Hudson McKenzie discuss with Lawyer Monthly.
Air pollution is a serious issue. Recent studies show that more than 95% of the Earth’s population is “breathing dangerously polluted air”, with annual deaths from poor air increasing by 20% since 1990.
This is despite several measures taken by multi-national platforms such as the EU to tackle the crisis, by implementing environmentally conscious legislation such as the EU ‘Air Quality Directive’ and the ‘Pollution Prevention and Control Act’ (1999).
Furthermore, these protective measures coincide with Article 2 of the Human Rights Act (HRA), in which every nation worldwide must comply with the securing of every citizens “right to life”. This means that every government should take “appropriate measures to safeguard life”, so that the average life expectancy of each citizen is not affected, as it may be by air pollution and climate change.
However, although each individual nation may take protective measures such as to reduce its carbon footprint through the decreasing use of plastic, or to make its major cities “car-free” so to decrease its air pollution, how effective is this protection whilst citizens are still burdened with the unmanageable cross-border pollution from neighboring nations?
Unlike the physical borders placed upon citizens between nations, air pollution knows no boundaries when it comes to travelling between one nation and another. Therefore, should there be an increase in global governance, so to tackle the ongoing crisis of air pollution and climate change?
By doing so, not only will nations become more unified in their co-operation against the issue of global air pollution and climate change, but the implementation of their own citizens Human Rights would be greatly exemplified, specifically the application of the human ‘right to life’.
In addition, the potentially increased global governance of the management of global pollution and the ongoing war against climate change could also see alternative future trade deals arising between nations, as the need for more ‘environmentally friendly’ commodities arise – such as demonstrated by highly polluted countries like China increasing their demand for ‘fresh air’ and related products from other countries.
Thus, due to the ongoing rise of air pollution and the serious impacts of unpredictable climate change upon every nation worldwide, a need for an enhanced global governance between all nations may be the only solution to tackling not only the management of cross-border pollution, but also the implementation of Human Rights law globally.
