This reviewer has mixed feelings when seeing or learning about another new journal. Those feelings range from pleasure at the possibility of another outlet for worthwhile contributions within the appropriate field to despair at yet more which may have to be read (and, one might add, at the prospect of another battle with library funders over whether or not yet another subscription can be afforded). Obviously pleasure can only be felt if one is convinced that the quality of the journal is promising, but enough such pleasure can obviously counteract any negative feelings (although, of course, it cannot produce the necessary cash for the library at any rate to purchase the journal). It is pleasing to be able to say at the outset that reading the first issue of this new journal, from the stable which already publishes the Restitution Law Review, has given me enough pleasure and interest to be able confidently to recommend it.

The first issue of the journal is a mixture of articles, shorter comments and book reviews which follows an established mold and clearly sets a sensible pattern for future issues (we are promised two a year initially). It covers a wide and growing field so that there should be no shortage of quality material. Its obvious rivals, in terms of British publications, seem to be the long-established Journal of Business Law and The Company Lawyer, in both of which I must declare an interest. However, its remit, which is principally company law, securities law and insolvency law, is narrower than that of the J.B.L., which covers commercial law more generally, and there is clearly scope for both in such an active marketplace. As far as The Company Lawyer is concerned, the publishers of that may have to look to their laurels. The C.f.i.L.R. looks more academic, in terms of size, layout etc., looks ready to carry articles of varying length, and may well appeal more to academically minded company lawyers as an outlet.

However, it is not just aimed at academics. There are leading practitioners associated with it, and the first issue, in which the quality of the pieces is very high indeed, contains a long article (on Insolvency Proceedings: Contract and Financing) by two distinguished practising insolvency experts. The remaining contributions, which range widely and are all learned and of interest, cover an analysis of chattel leases and insolvency, another and, to me, justifiable criticism of Attorney-General for Hong Kong v. Reid [1994] 1 A.C. 324, a valuable analysis of the validity of attempts to provide for the refloating of a floating charge, a shorter piece on the attribution of knowledge to companies, and detailed analyses of General Principle 7 of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers and the perennially difficult s. 317 of the Companies Act 1985. There is much food for thought in all of these and most will quickly become established as reference points. Short comments are to be found on the Law Commission Report on Fiduciary Duties and Regulatory Rules and on the decision in Eastglen v. Grafton [1996] 2 B.C.L.C. 279 and there are four decent book reviews.

This brief review has not attempted to give a detailed analysis of any of the pieces just referred to. But I hope that it may have whetted the appetite of any readers who have not yet seen the journal.