THE JACKSON family are world famous for their music, but it's Michael Jackson's lawsuits and civil litigation claims which have kept them in the spotlight in recent years.

A few days ago there was speculation that Michael Jackson hadn't written a will and his parents made a quick application to get control over his estate.

However, Michael Jackson's lawyer, John Branca holds a will that appoints himself and John McCain, a music executive, as co-executors of Michael Jackson's estate.

Paul Dennis is a solicitor at Kirwans

And the winners are:

Law Firm of the Year - Jackson & Canter
sponsored by Alpha Biolabs

Niche Law Firm of the Year - Shipley Solicitors
sponsored by Laird Assessors

Corporate Team of the Year - Halliwells
sponsored by The National Solicitors Network

Real Estate and Environment Law Team of the Year - DLA Piper
sponsored by SearchFlow

Personal Injury Team of the Year - John Pickering & Partners
sponsored by Frenkel Topping

Dispute Resolution Team of the Year - Weightmans
sponsored by Robinsons Personal Financial Planners

Employment Team of the Year - Hill Dickinson
sponsored by DX

President's Award for Human Rights Work - Jackson & Canter
sponsored by Liverpool Daily Post

Barrister of the Year - Paul Burns, Exchange Chambers
sponsored by Allied Irish Bank

Merseyside Junior Lawyers Division Person of the Year - Edward Turner, Berrymans Lace Mawer
sponsored by Liverpool John Moores University

EasyJet weddings - what next?

Interesting phenomena occurring in the North West recently: clients who comment that their divorce costs more than their wedding.

Now isn't that just about the most unromantic thing you've heard this week?

Admittedly, my choice of career (divorce lawyer) isn't generally hearts and flowers all the way but I'm a believer all the same. Can it be true that weddings are cheaper than divorces?

Search for DIY divorce and you get 44,000 hits. But search for DIY wedding and you get 5 times that amount. Isn't that enough to restore ones faith in all things nuptial? Maybe not.

A wedding, even a cheap wedding, is a wonderful thing. There may be limits, however, and I was as amazed as the next woman to hear that EasyJet had applied for a licence for pilots to conduct in-flight ceremonies.

Can you imagine? No offence, Stelios, but that has to be just about the most rubbish concept for a wedding I've ever heard.

An EasyJet plane, I ask you. A snake hipped teenage boy would have difficulty walking down that aisle.

Now imagine size 18 hips (to be fair, it's not going to be Tara Palmer-Tompkinson is it?) swathed in ivory netting and accompanied by their dad. No chance. And I have to question whether it would in fact be a cheap option. They might advertise a £19.99 return to Malaga but once you've added taxes, a suitcase (unless said size 18 meringue will suffice for 14 days' honeymoon as well) and a £4.00 mozarella panini for each guest, the final tally is hardly a budget deal, especially if you throw in a Stella each for the bridesmaids (at £3.50 a pop).

Luton Council has apparently turned down the application which, according to EasyJet's communications manager was a case of "faceless bureaucrats" scuppering the "dreams of many who wished to get married in the air". But for the rest of us (i.e. those who would prefer our pilots to actually fly the plane) it's probably a case of Stelios 0: Common sense 1.

If a cheap wedding is difficult, what then of the cheap divorce?

On that subject, the internet comes into its own. As I've said, there are tens of thousands of websites to guide the way.

I've had a look at a few of these sites and to be totally fair (and mindful I have a mortgage to pay) some of them aren't half bad.

However, there's a "but" and it's a big but. (A crass person may add that it is a but so big it would have no chance of walking down an EasyJet aisle).

Call me biased, but I'm a firm believer in the view that there is no substitute for expertise.

People forget that when they engage a lawyer, they are paying not just for their time but for the years of training and experience: I could probably download the instructions to re-wire my house but I have no doubt that if I attempted it, I would blow the place up.

There are some things which are just worth paying for. Some of the most expensive cases (in terms of costs) I've dealt with are those which involve "undoing" problems caused by clients going it alone.

So until EasyJet comes up with a DIY in-flight divorce, you may find it easier and cheaper to trust the experts.

Now back to frivolities. Dress is sorted for legal awards dinner (thank you good friend Betty), tickets are booked and loser face ("no, no, no I'm really pleased for you") face practised.

In the (unlikely) event of success, tips for faux-unrehearsed and sincere acceptance speech will be gratefully received (click "comments" below). In the meantime, I'll see if Stelios has any ideas: he's always good for a laugh.

Sam is a barrister with Atlantic Chambers

THERE is constant discussion as to whether we can call "the bottom of the property market" and with significant uncertainty still in the market it's a very difficult call to make.

But we have seen increasing signs of clients willing again to invest which suggests there may be profit to be made which is some change from the trend over past months.

A very significant and successful London based operator in the national property market said recently history has shown that residential property has, on average, risen between 6% and 7% per annum for the past 50 years, despite big ups and horrible downs. My experience over the last 25 years reflects that and it is a statement of fact.

Certain sectors remain relatively buoyant but buoyancy is still to a large degree capable of being maintained only by adequate funding and in that respect funding is still difficult to obtain without significant cash reserves to commit an equity stake.

The market that we will see emerge from the recent and current difficulties will be in my view a more sustainable and solid one. Gone perhaps forever in my opinion will be the ridiculously optimistic and unsound schemes we have from time to time seen some undertake making way for better balanced, more solidly founded and more socially beneficial schemes.

It is easy to comment with the benefit of hindsight and it is fair to say few if any saw the scale and significance of the current downturn.

That said soundly run property businesses (and to that extent businesses generally) will continue to prosper in the "new" market.

Clive is Head of Property at Weightmans

Merseyside's Justice Issues Working Group, chaired by Norman Draper, wants to close five of the city region's courts on Saturdays and Bank Holidays.

The move would save just over £20,000 a year.

The working group launched a consultation on the issue and are due to discuss it again at a meeting tomorrow.

But Liverpool Law Society's Criminal Practice Committee objected to the plans on a number of fronts.

It says the move would restrict access to local justice for defendants and their families.

It also fears problems would be caused by the lengthy paper trail needed to transfer cases from court to court. Violent prisoners could be let off because of lost paperwork or defendants could remain in custody for longer because documents are slow to reach the right court.

Solicitors also claim criminals who leave court in Liverpool not having enough cash to get back to homes elsewhere in Merseyside might be tempted to commit crimes to raise funds.

The knock-on effects of pulling agencies such as the police, probation service, the Crown Prosecution Service and the clerks and magistrates into Liverpool may cost more than the £20,000 central saving, the society adds.

John Ballam, chair of the Criminal Practice Committee, told LDP Legal: "Wirral and Liverpool courts are both already busy. With Bootle and the others, taken together it would result in an all- day sitting on Saturday.

"And there's going to be difficulties for everyone getting to Liverpool."

"The saving of £20,000 will be a court saving but it will push the costs up for all the agencies and for the families of defendants." Criminal lawyers are already feeling the pinch because of cuts to legal aid.

The law society say the changes would throw an unnecessary extra burden on a hard pushed part of the sector.

A spokesman for Her Majesty's Courts Service said: "The majority of Saturday and Bank Holiday magistrates cases are already heard at Liverpool Magistrates' Court and we need to ensure that we get value for tax payers' money.

"No decisions have yet been made to move Saturday or Bank Holiday cases to Liverpool Magistrates' Court. We are at the initial stage of consultation and are looking at all the representations that have been made to us."

It was a bad day for Everton fans when Chelsea lifted the FA Cup on Saturday, but law firm EAD Solicitors did at least manage to bring the trophy back to Merseyside last week.

Lee Flaherty, a Legal Executive in the Personal Injury department won a competition held by travel provider National Express to get the trophy brought to their office for a day - and he says that it was the next best thing to an Everton victory.

Lee said: "We all had great fun with the trophy on Thursday, and the experience got us even more excited for the match on Saturday. Even though Everton failed to win the match, we're still proud that the Cup was in the hands of Everton supporters- even if it was all too briefly."

I THOUGHT I'd kick off my LDPLegal blog with the 'exciting' news that the media are now allowed in the family courts... or so it was reported in the national press this week.

As a family barrister the new reforms regarding media access are of special interest to me and my kind and, given the fanfare surrounding the introduction of the new rules on April 27, I fully expected to turn up to Court this week being chased by the paparrazzi, and with cases being delayed whilst the queue to the ladies (for a quick re-application of lippy) stretched around the block.

I shouldn't have been worried.

Once in court, journos cannot read the case papers (without which the rest of the proceedings are likely to make little sense), cannot report on the details of the cases they attend without the specific permission of the judge and can be excluded at any time if it is felt to do so would be in the interests of justice.

A sad day then, it has been widely reported, for the campaigners who have fought hard to ensure open access to the family courts in the interests of openness and transparency.

But for those of us at the front line of the family justice system, we are breathing a sigh of relief.

Family proceedings, especially those involving children, are traumatic enough for the parties, without the prospect of journalists in attendance who might be able to discuss the details of their private life in the local and national press.

I'm all for openness and transparency but, especially in the local press, anonymised details of specific cases would be impossible to report without someone, somewhere making the link to the identity of the parties.

Even for those cases not involving children (specifically, financial cases upon divorce) some of the more "juicy" aspects of their private (for private, read "sex") lives disclosed by the parties, whilst they may be of public (for public, read "media") interest, cannot be said to be in the public interest to be made known.

Jack Straw has made it known, however, that these recent reforms are not the end of the matter and further reforms are proposed.

They will, no doubt, receive a mixed reception but for now, I'm just glad that the numerous pressures of the job will not be compounded by the additional worry of having to ensure I'm wearing matching shoes.

SAM HILLAS is a family law barrister with Atlantic Chambers.