John specialises in commercial and civil fraud litigation. Admitted as a solicitor in 1983, John worked in private practice and in-house for a leading life assurance company before establishing Bivonas with Antony Brown in 1997. John has extensive experience in a wide range of courts and tribunals including the UK Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and the Divisional Court. He has been involved in a number of important reported cases.
by John Bechelet in News, Regulatory
In Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland in the Eaglet said, “I don’t know the meaning of half those long words, and, what’s more, I don’t believe you do either!” Sharp L J said in Stocker v Stocker in the Court of Appeal, [2018] EWCA Civ 170: “The use of dictionaries does not form part of the… Read More
by John Bechelet in Regulatory
Takhar v Gracefield [2019] UKCA 13 is a Supreme Court case of fraud unravelling everything. In the case a photocopy document, a joint venture agreement, bearing an apparently authentic signature was produced. However, after the trial it transpired that the document was a forgery. The party’s signature accepted at trial to be genuine had been… Read More
by John Bechelet in Regulatory
It has been announced that the Financial Reporting Council (‘FRC’), the accounting watchdog, is to be closed down and replaced by a new regulator to be known as ARGA. This stands for the Audit, Reporting and Governance Authority. There have been a number of high profile audit failures in recent years and the big accountancy… Read More
by John Bechelet in Regulatory
In the reign of Queen Victoria, 1877 saw the first Wimbledon lawn tennis tournament. 5 years later the Royal Courts of Justice opened on the Strand. Both institutions are still going strong, but share a failure to recognise their fading glory. 10 million television viewers watched the FIFA 2018 World Cup Final, less than half… Read More
by John Bechelet in News
The courts have shown themselves out of step with public opinion. The Lord Chief Justice has said that MPs and peers who have used Parliamentary privilege to flout gagging orders erode confidence in the justice system. However, when Lord Hain used Parliamentary privilege to identify Sir Philip Green as the user of such gagging orders,… Read More
by John Bechelet in Regulatory
It has been reported in The Times and elsewhere that there has been a marked increase of judicial bullying. Judges shouting at and belittling those who appear before them. England has a long and established pedigree in judicial bullying and one of its leading proponents was Lord Ellenborough who convicted Lord Cochrane of fraud and… Read More
by John Bechelet in Employment, Regulatory
Lord Bingham identified certainty, clarity and predictability as key constituents of the Rule of Law. His portrait gazes down in the Supreme Court. Certainty, clarity and predictability are not so warmly espoused by the current President, Baroness Hale. The recent case of Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust v Sandi Haywood decided that notice of… Read More
by John Bechelet in Regulatory
Equifax, one of the world’s leading credit rating agencies is hacked. Personal information of individuals is accessed and many of these individuals have not consciously consented to Equifax holding their data, but have no choice in the modern world. No respectable media outlet, if offered this stolen personal data, would publish it. The position is… Read More
by John Bechelet in Regulatory
The great jurist Jeremy Bentham said that “Secrecy being an instrument of conspiracy, ought never to be the system of a regular government”. Lord Diplock in Home Office v Human [1983] AC, also quoting Jeremy Bentham said, “publicity is the very soul of justice… the surest of all guards against improbity”. However we live in… Read More
by John Bechelet in Regulatory
In Chen v Ng (British Virgin Islands) [2017] UKPC 27, the trial judge rejected Mr Ng’s evidence on the basis of matters that were never put to him in cross-examination. The judicial committee of the Privy Council allowed an appeal on this basis and remitted the case for re-trial. The case concerned a dispute about… Read More