Being able to communicate effectively is a core competency for in-house lawyers. You could have all the legal knowledge, strategic insight, and commercial awareness in the world, but if you cannot communicate your advice to your client in a way that they are likely to listen to, then you will not be able to fulfil your role effectively. When a question arrives by email, it is probably most convenient to answer it with another email—but what other communication channels are available to us, and how do we select the most effective method for communication? Understanding your audience Whatever your method of communication, the first thing you will need to do is to identify your audience. For example, are you communicating with an internal or external stakeholder? Are they a legal professional (and if so, what is their level of experience), a technical expert, a front-line employee, C-suite, a supplier, a customer, etc? How much do you know about this person? Do you know their preferences about how they prefer to communicate? How can you make it easier for

Law360: While the European blockchain industry is scurrying to implement the Market in Crypto-Assets Regulation by the end of this year, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) is detailing the authorisation process for investments in crypto-assets services providers (CASPs).

Immigration analysis: In the Home Office’s own words, the earned settlement proposals represent ‘the biggest shake-up of the legal migration system in nearly half a century’. The publication of the Government’s White Paper, ‘Restoring control over the immigration system’, on 12 May 2025, signalled its intention to introduce a new model of ‘earned settlement’, including increasing the qualifying period from five to ten years (with potential reductions for contribution to the economy and society), but provided scant detail, deferring this to a consultation process in ‘the autumn’. The hotly anticipated policy statement and consultation document, ‘A fairer pathway to settlement’ was finally published on 20 November 2025, setting out the proposals. Arguably, the 60-page document raises more questions than it answers, with a problematic lack of definitions, omission of important details, and conflicting references. In a number of respects, it goes much further than may have been foreseen from the initial indications of the White Paper. So what will it all mean for migrants and employers in the UK—and how can advisors help support them through these times of great uncertainty and seismic change? This article examines the main proposals, the key questions, and the practical implications. Written by Sophie Barrett-Brown, Senior Partner and Head of UK practice, Laura Devine Immigration.

Law360: The legal home to over two-thirds of Fortune 500 companies, [1] and over 1.9m other business entities, [2] Delaware is well positioned as a potential hotbed for petitions pursuant to Title 28 of the US Code—which allows foreign litigants access to US-based discovery in aid of their disputes abroad.

Property analysis: A Court of Appeal decision on how to determine the extent of a daughter’s beneficial interest in a property registered in the name of her late father and his second wife is considered by Michael Paget, of Cornerstone Barristers, who appeared for the appellant in Wodzicki v Wodzicki.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: Smitha Menon, partner at WongPartnership, and Stephanie Yeo, associate at the firm, explain the recent case of Re Opti-Medix Ltd (in liquidation) and another, and consider the effect of the judgment on the principle of universalism.

Corporate Crime analysis: The introduction of an online plea service from HM Courts and Tribunal Service allows people charged with traffic offences to enter their plea online and avoid going to court. Julie Robertson, partner and head of Motoring and Criminal Defences, talks through the implications of this service.

Dispute Resolution analysis: An application to amend was refused in Mark Lewis v Taylor Hampton as a collateral attack on a previous decision in the proceedings. William Christopher, partner in Kingsley Napley’s dispute resolution team, suggests the decision highlights that practitioners need to ensure the pleaded case is in order at the earliest opportunity.

Property analysis: In Moda International Brands Ltd v Gateley LLP (later known as Gateley Heritage LLP) and another, involving the alleged professional negligence of the a firm, Gateley Heritage (Gateleys), relating to a property transaction, the court had to determine how damages should be calculated. Ashwin Mody, director at Ashteds Solicitors, who acted for the claimant, discusses the decision of the court and its findings on the application of loss of chance damages.

Public Law analysis: Dervla Simm, associate at Hogan Lovells, examines Wasif and advises all practitioners involved in bringing judicial review applications to bear in mind the criteria for totally without merit (TWM) certification before making an application.

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: This case concerned a gas explosion in Sunderland in 2017, which destroyed two residential properties and caused significant personal injury. The claimant was, the court observed, ‘truly fortunate to survive this horrific incident’. It was agreed between the parties that the direct cause was corrosion damage to the one-inch diameter steel service pipe situated below the soil surface. The service pipe ran from the iron mains pipe to the internal installations. This allowed gas to escape and to accumulate within the property, eventually being ignited by the unwitting claimant. Written by Harry Lambert at Crown Office Chambers.

The system of controlling the transfer of any nuclear related material including goods, information, software and technology from the UK to another State.