![Pump Court Chambers](/img/default-banner.jpg)
- 63
- 40 825
Pump Court Chambers
United Kingdom
Приєднався 17 кві 2020
Pump Court Chambers is one of the UK’s premier common law chambers, with deep strength in civil, criminal and family law. Based in London and focusing on the South and West, our breadth of expertise and collaborative approach enable us to provide clients with joined-up, practical solutions across multiple specialisms in law. Our barristers and clerks are approachable, straightforward and focused on solving problems quickly and cost-effectively.
Contact Details:
Email: clerks@pumpcourtchambers.com
Telephonne: 020 7353 0711 / 01962 868 161
Website: www.pumpcourtchambers.com
Contact Details:
Email: clerks@pumpcourtchambers.com
Telephonne: 020 7353 0711 / 01962 868 161
Website: www.pumpcourtchambers.com
Default Judgments and Setting Aside Default Judgments - Rebekah Batt
In this webinar, Rebekah Batt, provides an overview of default judgments and setting aside default judgments including the relevant time limits, the grounds on which a default judgment can be set aside and the implications of recent decision in FXF v English Karate Association Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 891.
Переглядів: 296
Відео
Requests for Further Information - Albert Gibbon
Переглядів 819 місяців тому
In this webinar, Albert Gibbon provides an overview of Part 18 requests for further information. Albert offers a summary on making requests, responding to them, and making applications to court regarding said requests. He also provides his perspective on when and why requests might be made and responded to.
Introduction to CPR Part 36 - Nida Ali
Переглядів 2369 місяців тому
In this webinar, Nida Ali explains Section I of CPR Part 36 - the pivotal carrot and stick provision that all civil practitioners should understand to avoid being caught out in negotiations. With reference to key case law, this webinar discusses the central tenets of the self-contained code that is designed to reward genuine offers of settlement.
Foreign Language Clients - Oliver Foy
Переглядів 479 місяців тому
Ollie talks through some issues which can arise with foreign language clients, focusing on witness statements and interpreters.
Interim Payments: The Low Down - Louisa Simpson
Переглядів 1029 місяців тому
In this episode of the new practitioner webinar series, Louisa Simpson gives the low-down on Interim Payments in Personal Injury claims, including some practical tips for making IP applications.
Legally Flushed webinar with Imogen Robins and Joy Ogeh-Hutfield
Переглядів 98Рік тому
Imogen Robins hosts Joy Ogeh-Hutfield for the second Legally Flushed online event on the subject of success, both personal and professional, by harnessing a positive mindset, gaining clarity, direction and a sense of purpose. Trained by the renowned international US Coach, Tony Robbins, Joy has over 25 years experience in the coaching and leadership space and has worked with institutions and pe...
Legally Flushed Webinar with Imogen Robins and Lewis Robinson Coaching
Переглядів 56Рік тому
During the first Legally Flushed session, Lewis helps us to keep moving and gives us some top tips for everyday life. He is a very knowledgeable personal trainer who has significant expertise in biomechanics and pain. He has helped people avoid surgery through using a tailored approach to exercise and functional strength training. Lewis started his career playing for football for England as an ...
Employment Law Webinar - Heather Platt and Richard Wayman
Переглядів 230Рік тому
Heather Platt speaks to Richard Wayman about the case of McQueen v General Optical Council and Section 15 of the Equality Act. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/640afe67d3bf7f02fef88331/Philip_McQueen_v_General_Optical_Council 2023 EAT_36.pdf
Employment Law Webinar
Переглядів 300Рік тому
Heather Platt, Oliver Foy and Louisa Simpson explore two recent employment law cases: Dunbar v Abellio London Ltd 2307750/2020 in which Louisa Simpson represented the successful employer at London South Employment Tribunal: this was a Covid related dismissal claim involving health and safety at work and the provisions of section 100 Employment Rights Act 1996; and Meaker v Cyxtera Technology UK...
Limitations and practical considerations - Lucy Plumpton
Переглядів 52Рік тому
Limitations and practical considerations - Lucy Plumpton
Small Claims and the New Protocol for PI Small Claims - Rebekah Batt
Переглядів 83Рік тому
Small Claims and the New Protocol for PI Small Claims - Rebekah Batt
Credit Hire - A Beginners Guide - Henry Hawkesworth
Переглядів 851Рік тому
Credit Hire - A Beginners Guide - Henry Hawkesworth
No Fault Divorce - Tara Lyons and Samara Brackley - Tuesday 29th March 2022
Переглядів 7252 роки тому
No Fault Divorce - Tara Lyons and Samara Brackley - Tuesday 29th March 2022
TLATA Claims:Constructive Trusts and Proprietary Estoppel - Helen Brander and Paul Mertens
Переглядів 2,2 тис.2 роки тому
TLATA Claims:Constructive Trusts and Proprietary Estoppel - Helen Brander and Paul Mertens
Modern Parenting in the 21st Century: An overview of surrogacy - Jennifer Lee
Переглядів 3522 роки тому
Modern Parenting in the 21st Century: An overview of surrogacy - Jennifer Lee
Children: Public Law Update 2021 - Catherine Ellis
Переглядів 1 тис.2 роки тому
Children: Public Law Update 2021 - Catherine Ellis
An Introduction to Employment Law - Alice Scott and Oliver Foy
Переглядів 3722 роки тому
An Introduction to Employment Law - Alice Scott and Oliver Foy
Public Law Reforms Working Group Part 2 - Leslie Samuels QC
Переглядів 1483 роки тому
Public Law Reforms Working Group Part 2 - Leslie Samuels QC
No Jab, No Job - Daniella Gilbert & Siân Beaven
Переглядів 3973 роки тому
No Jab, No Job - Daniella Gilbert & Siân Beaven
Gross Misconduct Dismissals - Richard Wayman
Переглядів 6 тис.3 роки тому
Gross Misconduct Dismissals - Richard Wayman
Gross Misconduct Dismissals - Richard Wayman
Переглядів 2783 роки тому
Gross Misconduct Dismissals - Richard Wayman
Adjourning Capital Claims - Cordelia Williams
Переглядів 1663 роки тому
Adjourning Capital Claims - Cordelia Williams
Public Law Working Group Reforms - Leslie Samuels QC
Переглядів 2263 роки тому
Public Law Working Group Reforms - Leslie Samuels QC
Family Finance Update - Richard Hall - HD
Переглядів 3623 роки тому
Family Finance Update - Richard Hall - HD
Is very difficult to hear things between his swallowing habits
That was very interesting Jules and will pass to my probate team Thanks
23:30 - for my own reference (discrimination concurrent with). Not sure what is meant by ‘accept breach’… 32:40 - doesn’t this contradict the ‘can’t give yourself time to look for a job’, or is this only within the notice period?
This was fantastic. Super valuable as CD is a tough one to plan out. 🙌
Please put slides on. Thanks
Hi, i have a query which you may be able to help me with. so in the case of Dobson v Griffey, you speak on their being no agreement nor detrimental reliance, which means it does not satisfy the express agreement from Rosset, however, you also speak on there being a trust inferred from their conduct, as in the inferred trust from Rosset. Was the case argued on both elements from Rosset, or just the 1? many thanks
My ex wife made offer with drew it got rid off her solicitor and represented her self put in lower offer she is solicitor herself.
Thank you for making and such a structured and informative video. It is very helpful and succinct. Peace & Love, Queen Ester, UK
I am gonna watch this video again and again and again Just what the doctor ordered Magnificent Ta
What if the courts refuse to take evidence of misuse or courts or vexatious claims into account? I’ve just been ordered to pay my stalkers costs after they launched a case against me to intimidate me into dropping a civil and criminal claim. Knocked it into high court by lying about damages, judge wasn’t interested and ordered me to pay costs despite evidence showing I offered to settle, he lied, case was a farce, the lot. I could have proven their costs were unnecessary but judge couldn’t be bothered to listen. Now owe 60k I don’t have. What do I do??
This was so good...My Employer did everything WRONG
very interesting thanks
If on long yerm sick, caused by an accident at work, and no sick pay, the employee is left claiming benefits . If the employee resigns, even as a constructive dismissal, they can be "sanctioned" as it counts as a resignation and can lose all benefits and left penniless. In the case i have been involved in, after many known breaches and altered accident / fire safety/ Cossh teports, they were forced to wait to be fired. Now my argument is that he couldnt resign thru constructive dismissal to the Tribunal. A horrible dilemma
Area of not ABLE to constructively dismiss if on long term sick and forced to claim benefits for sick pay run out, can mean employee being "sanctioned" and lose all benefits as dwp see it as "resigned" so have up employment. Few can give an answer as to ehether benefits are sanctioned. This needs taking into account
Hello - so I bounced back and forth with junior member of my union - f##king useless. This is very clear cut and definitive - awesome Ezra! I did resign after an industrial accident after 11 months service. This was 2021 almost about to go to tribunal - personal injurie claim will follow later. So unfortunate I couldn't resign and present Repudiatory Breach at the same time along with my grievance - buggers put me in hospital before I could. - This is one of the most concise and sensible media on you tube - well done!
Helen Brander- the worst barrister ever to come across. A weak and biased barrister, and poor preparation of the casework. Messed up my case a big time .......please stay away and never recommend to anyone
please your contacts
Excellent.
Excellent information thank you .
The whole issue of whether using a grievance procedure could be deemed as affirmation is such a grey area. I think it’s fair to say you would usually be expected to lodge a grievance before claiming constructive dismissal, otherwise any damages you are awarded at an employment tribunal could be reduced.
I have just put a grevance in....so this is very helpful.
Why is it a grey area to put In a grvance?? You need this to tell hr what is wrong.. to cover you.
Brilliant video! Thank you so much Update: I followed the guidance/information in the video, lodged an ET claim for constructive dismissal. Recently Settled amicably via ACAS for a financial lump sum 👍
May ask how was your lumpsum calculated? A few months salary? Just about to go through the same and not sure how or what to ask? After 5yrs employment
Hi my case is full off case management and mess up with Oxfordshire family courts and Northampton South ss.. Cheers
Great, as if faithless wives didn't already have enough incentive to bail on their marriages and take their husbands to the cleaners.
Many thanks. I’m representing a friend in an unfair dismissal case soon and this has been really useful.
how is "the more warped the defendant's standards of honesty the less likely it is to be convicted of dishonest behaviour" interpreted.
What about working under protest pending resolution of the grievance? What if the employer is deliberately delaying handling the grievance?
I have the same question.
This is amazing video! Really helped, dealing with tribunals on my own and this has helped so much when I feel so lost!
Thank You. Very comprehensive. God Bless.
You censored my comment but perhaps ypu could at least respond to the question of impartiality with expert witnesses? In the case of the circumcision the paper states: "Cohen J, who gave permission for the instruction of Mr. Mangera, specifically incorporated into the proposed instruction that the expert should be "able to speak as to the religious importance and timing of the procedure"." I note that Cohen J is likely of Jewish cultural background and therefore from a practicing community, doesn't this breach impartiality? Imagine a case with female circumcision and the person instructing the expert as well as the expert are both from practicing communities, would this be acceptable?
Thank goodness he didn't have to have his genitals mutilated but frankly that this is legal let alone a finely balanced decision is appalling. We have the radical feminist Fran Hoskin and her unholy alliance with strong reactionary forces, to thank for the discrimination meted out to boys with respect to the lack of protection they have when it comes to genital mutilation. She had her two sons cut so it was vital for her to construct a narrative making it a gross violation of a child's dignity to mutilate their genitals, as long as the child was a girl, boys genitals didn't count! Extraordinary that her narrative became the standard and as a result the proportion of children, both boys and girls cut has only increased in the last three generations since. Cases like this serve to bring the law into disrepute, along with the medical profession, most human rights organisations and politicians.
Thanks guys for the free webiner. It has been very helpful and informative.
This was very helpful, thank you
Thank you, extremely Useful. 👍🏻
thank you , very good explanation