The Lawyer Africa Elite 2014 features an in-depth look at 46 leading independent firms’ strategies in 15 key sub-Saharan jurisdictions, as well as the views of in-house counsel from some of Africa’s largest companies... Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
A legal battle over the right to market a product aimed at keeping teeth white is on its way to the Law Lords. Lords Hope, Browne-Wilkinson and Hutton have given leave for Optident to challenge Appeal Court backing for moves by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry which it says amount to unlawful obstruction of its marketing programme. The company claims that Opalescence, the product at the centre of the battle, is "a medical device" and in Germany has been licensed with a CE mark under the Medical Devices Directive 93/42/EEC. But the Secretary of State has taken the view that under the EEC Cosmetics Directive it is a cosmetic. The legal status of the product dictates the level of hydrogen peroxide it can contain. The House of Lords is to decide whether a CE mark obtained in one EC member state can be over-ruled by another. The Lords will also be asked to decide the true legal status of Opalescence as a "cosmetic" or "medical" device.