Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark: possession - mortgagee's right or discretionary remedy?

Comments on the Chancery Division decision in Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark on whether a mortgagee's exercise of its contractual right, on the mortgagor falling into arrears, to appoint receivers such that the property could be sold and possession obtained without triggering the court's discretionary powers pursuant to the Administration of Justice Act 1970 s.36 infringed the mortgagor's rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 Protocol 1 art.1. Considers the implications of proposed reforms recasting the mortgagee's right to possession as a discretionary remedy. [From Legal Journals Index]

Confidentiality or disclosure?

Considers the discretion of the trustees to disclose the settlor's wishes to the beneficiaries of a family discretionary trust. Discusses the confidentiality principle relating to family discretionary trusts and whether a settlor's wish letter falls within the scope of that principle. Sets out the guidance of the court in Breakspear v Ackland for trustees faced with a request for disclosure from a beneficiary.

The visibility/invisibility paradox of trust: Developing distributed educational leadership for online communities

A visibility/invisibility paradox of trust operates in the development of distributed educational leadership for online communities. If trust is to be established, the team-based informal ethos of online collaborative networked communities requires a different kind of leadership from that observed in more formal face-to-face positional hierarchies. Such leadership is more flexible and sophisticated, being capable of encompassing both ambiguity and agile response to change. Online educational leaders need to be partially invisible, delegating discretionary powers, to facilitate the effective distribution of leadership tasks in a highly trusting team-based culture. Yet, simultaneously, online communities are facilitated by the visibility and subtle control effected by expert leaders. This paradox: that leaders need to be both highly visible and invisible when appropriate, was derived during research on 'Trust and Leadership' and tested in the analysis of online community case study discussions using a pattern-matching process to measure conversational interactions. This paper argues that both leader visibility and invisibility are important for effective trusting collaboration in online distributed leadership. Advanced leadership responses to complex situations in online communities foster positive group interaction, mutual trust and effective decision-making, facilitated through the active distribution of tasks.