Wine, Chocolate & Dancing At Pajarito Saturday

first_imgWine, chocolate and dancing 2-5 p.m. Saturday at Pajarito. Courtesy photoCOMMUNITY News:Pajarito is showing the love this Valentine’s Day with wine, chocolate and dancing.The event is actually 2-5 p.m. Saturday, Feb. 15 and includes: Chocolate from Rose Chocolatier;Wine from Unquarked; andMusic and dancing from El Duo del Sabor “Sol Y Luna” featuring Carlos Fontana the lead singer for Nosotros.This event is FREE for skiers and snowboarders with a $7 cover charge for nonskiing or snowboarding guests.last_img

Grosvenor closes in on £500m Crawley scheme

first_imgWould you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week.last_img

Software: website capitalises on new technology

first_imgTo access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week. Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletterslast_img

Norwich Property Trust takes out loan to shore up liquidity

first_imgTo access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week. Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletterslast_img

Surrey state of affairs

first_imgWould you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week.last_img

Arena Central ready to help Birmingham shake off prejudices

first_imgWould you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week.last_img

Personal injury

first_img Simon Butler, Johnathan Payne (instructed by Stone Rowe Brewer) for the appellant; Lord Faulks QC, Quintin Tudor-Evans (instructed by Barlow Lyde & Gilbert) for the respondent. Negligence – Hospitality and leisure – Breach of duty of care – Foreseeability The appellants (E) appealed against a decision dismissing their claims for damages for personal injury arising from an incident at a nightclub, owned and managed by the respondent company (C), when they were injured in a knife attack perpetrated by another guest (G). The nightclub was part of a hotel. Use of the nightclub was restricted to members and their guests and hotel residents. E were guests at the nightclub. It was said that one of the group they were with touched a waitress (K) on the bottom. She did not complain but the incident was witnessed by a member (B) who was aggrieved on her behalf. He told her, more than once, that those responsible would apologise to her before the end of the evening. B was later joined at the nightclub by G. K was concerned that there might be a confrontation and went to speak to the manager. At that time E decided to leave the nightclub. B asked for an apology which was not forthcoming. G then attacked E and stabbed them with a knife. The judge held that C could owe a duty to protect its guests from the actions of a third party, on the basis that there might be such a degree of proximity between the parties that a legal duty would arise. However, he held that no duty of care arose in the circumstances because, at the time when K left the bar to speak to the manager, there was not a sufficiently great risk of injury; she was not under a duty to do anything about G at that stage. If she had done nothing, she could not have been criticised. All she had was a suspicion that there might be some sort of confrontation. But it was not known that G had a weapon and there had been no history of B or his associates being violent. E submitted that in the circumstances the judge should have concluded that there was a duty of care and that there had been a breach. C contended that there should be no duty on the managers of a bar to protect guests from violence by other guests and, if there was any duty at all, it should be drawn very restrictively. Held: (1) The test for the existence of a duty of care was the threefold test of proximity, foreseeability and whether it was fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty, Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 HL and Van Colle v Chief Constable of Hertfordshire [2008] UKHL 50, [2009] 1 AC 225 followed (see paragraph 24 of judgment). (2) The relationship between the management of a nightclub and its guests was of sufficient proximity to justify the existence of a duty of care. It was foreseeable that there was some risk that one guest might assault another; that was recognised by C’s own risk assessment. It was fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care on the management of a nightclub in respect of injuries caused by a third party, provided that the scope of the duty was appropriately set (paragraphs 31-33). (3) Thus there was a duty on the management of a nightclub in respect of the actions of third parties on the premises, but the standard of care imposed or the scope of the duty had also to be fair, just and reasonable. As between the managers of a nightclub and guests, there should not be a higher degree of foreseeability than was required under the common duty of care in the Occupiers Liability Act 1957, Home Office v Dorset Yacht Co Ltd [1970] AC 1004 HL considered. The degree of proximity, including the ­economic relationship, between the two was so close that no special rule of foreseeability was required in the interests of fairness, justice and ­reasonableness. The judge did not ­misdirect himself when he adopted the Australian case of Chordas v Bryant (Wellington) [1988] 91 ALR 149 Fed Ct (Aus) (Full Ct) as the basis of the duty, Chordas considered ­(paragraphs 34, 35). (4) In all the circumstances, K had not been in breach of duty. She had realised that there was a possibility of a confrontation between G and one or more of the members of E’s group. But there was no reason to think that a confrontation was imminent. The incident to which B had taken exception had occurred a considerable time earlier. B had no previous history of causing trouble, either himself or through his associates. K could not have been criticised even if she had done nothing. As it was, she went to speak to her manager. That was a reasonable thing for her to do. There was no apparent urgency; it was not as if a confrontation had begun and the risk of violence was imminent (paragraph 37). Appeal dismissed. center_img Everett and Anor v Comojo (UK) Ltd (T/A the Metropolitan and Ors): CA (Civ Div) (Lords Justices Rix, Richards, Lady Justice Smith): 18 January 2011last_img read more

Wagenborg Nedlift opens in Akersloot

first_imgThe Akersloot branch has already handled the transportation of onshore drilling rigs in the North Holland area and will also provide logistic services for the construction of a 12 km gas pipeline which is part of the Bergermeer Gas Storage (BGS) project.The new Wagenborg Nedlift office is located on the IOT Dosco site, De Boekel in Akersloot.IOT-Dosco is an internationally well-known rental and trading company operating in the oil, gas, salt water/geothermic and ‘HDD drilling’ sector with subsidiaries in The Netherlands, Romania, Azerbaijan and the United Arab Emirates.www.wagenborg.comlast_img

BNSF inks Schnabel deal

first_imgTTS/BNSF will manage, maintain and have priority access to the Schnabel railcar, which was originally designed for specific Siemens transformers, but has pin locations that allow for the movement of a wide variety of transformer designs, said BNSF.TTS engineers have also designed adapters that will allow even more transformer designs to be moved using the railcar.In addition to the KWUX 101 railcar, TTS also owns three cabooses, three more Schnabel railcars, and two 12-axle flatcars – all of which are stored in Rincon, Georgia.  www.bnsflogistics.comlast_img

Retention rates high at magic circle firms

first_imgTwo magic circle firms revealed higher autumn retention rates in a week of upbeat City announcements.Slaughter and May is taking on 37 of its 40 trainees (92.5%), up on last year’s figure of 86%. Some 39 trainees put themselves forward, one was rejected and one chose not accept an offer.Linklaters is taking on 49 of 54 trainees qualifying this autumn, a retention rate of 91%. This is significantly higher than last year, when 73% of trainees went on to become newly qualified associates. From the qualifying cohort, four trainees resigned and one was rejected.Richard Hodgson, trainee development partner at Linklaters, said: ‘We are pleased once again to retain a high number of quality lawyers from our September qualifiers. Attracting, developing and retaining the best people is crucial to our success.’Allen & Overy, Clifford Chance and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer are yet to report.This season’s high retention rate coincides with a bullish set of financial results. National firm Shoosmiths announced a rise in net profit and profit per equity partner (PEP) last week, despite a ‘challenging’ market. In the financial year 2018/19, net profit grew by 6% to £37.9m and PEP 2% to £441,000. Revenue was £137.6m, a 7% increase.Meanwhile, the listed Gordon Dadds Group reported increases in profits and revenue. For the 12 months to 31 March, Gordon Dadds saw revenue rise 69% to £52.6m and adjusted profit before tax climb 141% to £5.9m. However, the company spent £14.3m on its acquisition of international firm Ince & Co. It now has net borrowings of £2.9m, compared with net cash of £8.4m the previous year.last_img read more