King Irving’s Post

This article showcases my dedicated son-in-law's environmental work in DC. His positive attitude and willingness to tackle difficult projects and see them through to a successful outcome is admirable. Great work, Lee!

con·si·glie·re /kän-(ˌ)si-glē-ˈye-rē/ noun a person who serves as an adviser or counselor to the leader of a criminal organization. I'm told this is 75% of what I do with coachees... minus ordering hits, of course. 20% is fire starting... 5% is Hugger In Chief. The only reason I don't use "consigliere" as a working title is that most people see it and ask me to: 1. Order a car service 2. Make dinner reservations 3. Score last-minute tickets to the matinee of "Hamilton" -------------- Need your own consigliere? Bryoncé's got your back.

Investing in staff development is so important. Here's a few insights from our CO from a learning programme she is undertaking through CO3 Chief Officers 3rd Sector.

The Joint Spring Meeting of the GPSolo, Law Practice and Young Lawyers Divisions of the American Bar Association is perhaps the most collaborative and truly welcoming conference I’ve ever attended. #welcomehome #professionalism #lawyerlife

All this despair/excitement about SCOTUS's overruling of the Chevron doctrine (judicial deference to public bodies' interpretation of their own statutory powers in cases of ambiguity) brings me back to a culture shock I felt years ago upon first studying US administrative law after first learning about UK administrative law. The way it works in UK administrative law, since the 1960s anyway, is that the legal scope of a public body's power is a matter for the courts to decide as objectively as they can based on the natural meaning of the statutory (or other legal instrument) wording, aided by certain context and (narrow) indications of intention in the event of ambiguity. Having determined the scope of legality, a UK court shows great deference to a public body's decision. Assuming it has followed the necessary process, its decision will only be overturned if irrational. Or (since the late 1990s) in violation of human rights - and considerable deference (the 'margin of appreciation') applies there. The culture shock for me was that the US position could fairly be described, until Chevron was overruled, as being the other way around: more deference to the public body's interpretation of the scope of power on the one hand, but on the other hand more willingness to second-guess on the exercise of power. A US legal writer, Robert C. Dolehide, described it like that in this 2010 article, and very fairly (in my view) noted how this needs to be understood in the context of the very different constitutional power structures of the US and UK. You can read the first few pages here, which give the gist: https://lnkd.in/e73HSxXe For UK courts' commitment to the courts being the arbiter of the meaning of statutes, regulations and even a public body's own policy documents, see this 2020 decision of a High Court judge at paragraph 34, noting the rejection of attempts to apply a Chevron doctrine to policy documents: https://lnkd.in/e4zqvbN2 A leading case, mentioned there, incidentally, is a decision of the UK Supreme Court involving the Dundee Asda store on the A90 (Kingsway) and related to who had the final word on the interpretation of a development plan. https://lnkd.in/eugJH2fp So far as I know, this non-Chevron doctrine is not widely known as the Dundee Asda doctrine. Perhaps it should be! Anyway, the point is that comparative law is a difficult business as law often only really makes sense in the context of the whole of the local system. Speaking for myself, I'm rather glad that the UK doesn't have a Chevron doctrine as it seems inimical to the rule of law as the system applies here. But I can understand why, after forty years of reliance on it in the US, and given the constitutional power structures there, and the particular areas in which it 'bites', it's just different there. https://lnkd.in/enHdxSSM

𝐕𝐈𝐏𝐋 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐮𝐧 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐖𝐞𝐞𝐤 2 𝐔𝐩𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞!  Week 2 has drawn to a close, revealing the champions of the moment! The competition has been fierce as teams vied for the coveted top spot, resulting in some exciting shifts on the leaderboard. Here are the standout performers: Top 3 Teams: 🥇Mumbai Meridians, under the dynamic leadership of Senior Attorney Almira Lasrado, claim the coveted first position. 🥈Charminar Challengers, led by our Partner Harshavardhan Deshmukh, secure a strong second place. 🥉Bombay Boundary Blazers, guided by our Principal Attorney Hetal Master Patel, clinch an impressive third spot. 🎉 Congratulations to the top performing attorneys: Senior Attorney Arundhati Korale, Principal Attorney Hetal Master and Junior Attorney surendranath vurivi ! Discover the current standings of each team by watching the linked video below! See where your favorite teams stand in the competition and which ones are leading the pack. Will these teams and attorneys be able to keep their top spots in the 3rd week? Stay tuned to find out. #vipl #legalrunchaseweek2update #legalrunchase #topteams #teamleadership #attorneyperformance #legalcompetition #legalleadership #legalchampions #attorneyexcellence #legalcommunity #teamspirit #teamachievements #legalbattle #staytuned https://lnkd.in/eUSBsf5W

c toout crochets TD TP CINQ ASPI' LAW >>> BOBY

To coin Shakespeare, "What's in a [charity's] name?"..... With the news yesterday that The Prince's Trust, the young people's charity, has, after 50 years, changed its name (and logo) to The King's Trust, I reflected on the great history of charity and those who have, for a variety of strategic or practical reasons, changed names. A charity's name is arguably the most fundamental and valuable element of its brand identity, shaping how it is perceived, trusted, and supported. Name changes often arise as part of a wider rebrand, when a charity is seeking to refresh its image, or appeal to a broader or different audience, or to better reflect its mission, goals, or values. At other times, it is part of an expansion or shift in focus, when a charity expands its geographical reach, or diversifies its services. In a 'busy' sector, names can be changed to distinguish a charity and to avoid confusion amongst the public with other charities with similar names. When charities merge or partner with other organisations, a name change is reflective of a combined entity, or a shared vision, moving forwards. Legal or regulatory reasons may necessitate a charity to change its name, for example if another organisation has the rights to a similar name. Sometimes a charity's name becomes associated with controversy, or negative perceptions, and so a rename can help the charity distance itself from that and start afresh. A new name can be part of a fundraising strategy to increase visibility, or to align with similar causes which are more relevant to the public. And or course, a charity may change its name because the original one is culturally insensitive, or no longer appropriate in a modern context. From a charity law (and company law in the case of charitable companies) point of view, there are certain requirements of a charity in terms of its name, and restrictions on what can and can't be included. Certain words also need specific permission before the Charity Commission will register. (Consideration should of course always be given to intellectual property considerations too.) In addition, the Charities Act 2022 extended the Commission's powers in relation to charity names (including working names), such that the Commision has the power to direct a charity to change its formal name in a range of circumstances, and indeed will not register a charity if the proposed name is, for example, misleading, or offensive. Of course, its always best to take legal advice at an early stage from Higgs LLP 💡 And so finally, a quick pop quiz. Do you know what these well known charities are now known as? Answers below 👇 ❓ The Disabilities Trust ❓ The Foundling Museum ❓ CLIC Sargent ❓ Bloodwise ❓ Marie Stopes International #charity #charitylaw #charitylawyers #charityteam #CharityCommission

This is exactly right.

Upon Further Review: Litigation Arising From Sports Contracts, Transactions, and Intellectual Property, and How to Prevent It Today (June 20, 2024) at 1:30 p.m. CT, Sarah Pack and I will be speaking at State Bar of Texas Annual Meeting at the Hilton Anatole in Dallas, Texas on the topic referenced above. If you are available and in town, come check us out. #SportsLaw #DennieSportsLaw #DFWSportsLaw #TexasSportsLaw https://lnkd.in/g26BG8iE