Author: Vanessa James Over the past 12 months many employers have had to make redundancies and even though some commentators claim the ‘green shoots’ of recovery are here, businesses are still feeling the effects of the downturn. Businesses could potentially cut back their workforces yet further, but they run the risk of losing valuable talent which could jeopardise the business in the long term. But what are the alternatives? Well I was recently commissioned to write an article for PAY Magazine entitled ‘Imposing Contractual Changes’ , which outlines some of the alternatives such as how to lawfully announce pay freezes or pay cuts and how to negotiate with employees and avoid the risk of claims such as breach of contract.
See the rest here:
Alternatives to Redundancy
Andria Bolton
Local Solicitors UK | Compensation Claims UK
Author: Terrence Trainor In a recent High Court decision a wife was successful in convincing a panel of three High Court Judges to increase maintenance of £113,000 per annum (this being a global sum for the wife and children) to £195,000 per annum. In this instance, the wife was successful in increasing her maintenance substantially in light of the husband’s increase in wealth combined with his income increasing significantly from £552,000 gross per annum to £1.86 million gross per annum in the same period. Importantly, the Court concluded the increase in income for the husband appeared secure and was likely to continue into the foreseeable future. It therefore raises the question as to whether the Court would have reached the same conclusion if they felt the husband’s future income was susceptible to risk. Lord Justice Thorpe said the most important factor was the “husband’s greatly increased income” in finding that the original sum awarded had in fact been too small. Interestingly, the Court was of the view the wife had a responsibility to operate a prudent economy with her finances and she must also anticipate a possible future fall in maintenance if the husband’s career was to faultier in the future. This case raises interesting questions and it would seem in the current economic climate with incomes falling or staying stagnant it will continue to fuel the number of applications being made to the Court to re-consider the issue of maintenance.
The rest is here:
Wife Awarded Greater Share of Husbands Future Income
Andria Bolton
Local Solicitors UK | Compensation Claims UK
Author: Vanessa James As increasing numbers of people become unwell with swine flu it is important that employers are well prepared to deal with the likelihood of their employees being absent from work. Many employees will catch the H1N1 strain of the flu virus or will need to care for dependents who become ill. This may put considerable pressures on employers. Dealing with absences Employers should take this opportunity to review their sick leave/pay and dependent leave policies to ensure that they deal with the potential for staff to be absent from work. For example, employers should check whether their sick pay policy offers enhanced sick pay and for how long. Employers may wish to consider being more generous and lenient with their sick leave and dependent leave policies to try and encourage staff to stay at home rather than forcing themselves in to work and spreading the infection. Employees who are genuinely sick but do not take time off can also make themselves worse and end up having to take more time off in the long run. Employers have a duty to protect the health and safety of their employees and should not knowingly allow those infected with swine flu to attend work. The HSE advises that anyone who has flu symptoms and believes they may have been exposed to the swine flu virus should stay at home until they are fully recovered. Once the symptoms have subsided it is then safe for people to return to work as there is no longer a risk of infection to others. Staff should have more than just a fear of contracting the virus to justify staying away from work. Nevertheless, employers should bear in mind that those employees who have a genuine fear that attending work is a health hazard may be more willing to run the risk of disciplinary action than of contracting swine flu. Employers must make it clear to employees that they are expected to attend work unless they develop flu symptoms. If members of your staff do become unwell with swine flu, you must inform them to stay at home. They will potentially spread the virus for 7 days from when they first develop symptoms. In recent days GP surgeries have become inundated and those with flu like symptoms are being asked to call NHS Direct rather than visit surgeries. This will make obtaining documentation to verify the illness more difficult. Employers may want to request that employees who have had the illness obtain a letter from their GP to confirm that they are no longer infectious. Informing Staff To prevent the spread of swine flu in the workplace and to protect the health and safety of employees it is important to let staff know if one of their colleagues contracts the virus. However, employers should not inform staff of the identity of the infected employee, this should be kept confidential. Preventing the spread of swine flu As part of an employer’s duty to protect the health and safety of their staff, employers should ensure that staff are aware of the symptoms of swine flu. Employers should encourage good hygiene practices, such as hand washing and using tissues. Employers must make certain that staff are not scared or embarrassed to admit that they have swine flu. By making it clear that there will be no disciplinary repercussions for being absent with swine flu and that information will be treated confidentially will encourage openness and honesty from employees. Employers should provide a copy of the NHS leaflet on swine flu to all members of staff. Contingency Employers should consider how their business will operate in the event that a high proportion of the work force are absent. Businesses need to plan ahead for the need (and added expense) of bringing in temporary staff. They may also want to think about the possibility of staff (particularly senior employees) working from home. The technology for remote working will need to be in place if this is a viable option for the Employer. If the situation becomes much worse and the rate of deaths caused by swine flu rises, it might be necessary to look at more drastic measures such as suspension (on full pay) for those employees who are considered ‘high risk’ and have other health problems i.e. pregnant employees.
Here is the original:
Swine Flu
Andria Bolton
Local Solicitors UK | Medical Negligence
Author: Chris Cook The Government has this week published an article in “Building a society for ages” that its date to review the current default retirement age of 65 will be brought forward from 2011 to 2010. The reason for the change is to reflect the “change in economic circumstances” that has arisen since the default retirement age was introduced when the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations came into force in 2006. According to the BBC, the vast majority of the workforce retire before reaching the age of 65, although 1.3 million workers remain in work beyond state pension age. It is apparent that many more than that would work beyond that age if their employers were prepared to let them do so. Prime Minister Gordon Brown explained: “Evidence suggests that allowing older people to continue working, unfettered by negative views about ageing, could be a big factor in the success of Britain’s businesses and our future economic growth.” There has been a mixed response to the Government’s move. The Confederation of British Industry expressed their disappointment at the move, stating that the default retirement age helps businesses plan for the future. However, the TUC received the news much more positively, stating that “Employees should have choice - neither forced by employers to give up work, nor forced by inadequate pensions into working longer than they should.” Although the Government intends to ask both employer and employee groups their views on the default retirement age, it now seems likely that in light of the Prime Minister’s comments, the default retirement age will either be raised or removed completely.
More here:
Default Retirement Age to be Reviewed
Author: Lynsey Newman Landlords could be seeking to reclaim millions as a result of the recent ruling in Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons [2009] . Charges which are unfair and that are hidden away in the small print of terms and conditions could leave letting agents open to claims from landlords seeking to recover historic fees. Foxtons’ standard terms which included charging commission at 11% for tenancy renewals and 2.5% when tenants went on to buy the property even where Foxtons had little or no involvement in the process where held to be unfair by the High Court. The Court ruled that to be fair contracts should be clear and the language used should be plain and intelligible. Important terms should be brought to the attention of the customer, as a typical customer would not expect such important terms to be hidden away in the small print. This landmark decision serves as a warning to letting agents as to the enforceability of their terms of business and charging structure and the importance of highlighting these to their customers. Please click here to read an article which explores the ruling in the case and provides practical advice for compliance with the Foxtons decision.
Go here to read the rest:
Buy-to-Let Landlords can Claim Millions as a Result of Foxtons Ruling
Author: Marilyn Bell On 27 April this year the family court doors were opened. Some would say this was just by a crack because of the reporting restrictions. The Justice Secretary Jack Straw is now proposing to improve the transparency of the family court by relaxing the reporting restrictions. So far so good but where will this take us. Cases involving children are some of the most sensitive. There are two main kinds of proceedings involving children: Private law proceedings involve disputes, usually between the parents, as to where the children shall live and how much contact they shall have with the non resident parent. Understandably pressure has come from Fathers who feel they have been denied contact with their children and opening up the family court is welcomed as long as the anonymity of the children can be assured. Public law proceedings usually involve children being removed from their parents and taken into the care of the local authority. Ultimately the children may return to their parents, or be fostered, or adopted. The media can now attend Court and hear the evidence. However, they are already realising that the main body of the evidence is contained in the detailed documentation usually running to many lever arch folders. How is this to be approached in the light of greater transparency? Reporters are already suggesting they should be able to read the experts reports, but the experts reports refer to the documents the experts has relied on. Should all these documents therefore be available? Parents may disagree with the experts, if so, should the media therefore have the parents statements as well? These are just some of the questions that will have to be taken into consideration.
Go here to read the rest:
Opening up our family courts
Author: Andrew Nellist Following the untimely death of Michael Jackson it emerged that he had, in his Will, nominated his mother as guardian for his children. In the event that his mother had predeceased him Diana Ross was nominated in her place. In England and Wales the appointment of Guardians and the rights they have are governed by Section 5 of the Children Act 1989. A parent with Parental Responsibility may appoint a Guardian by Will or by a document which they date and sign and which provides that the appointment only takes effect on their death. A child’s mother acquires Parental Responsibility on the birth of their child which can only be removed in specific circumstances for example if the child is adopted. The husband of the mother at the time of the child’s birth automatically acquires Parental Responsibility as does a father named on a birth certificate after 1st December 2003. This applies even in situations where the child was born as a result of Artificial Insemination by a Donor (AID). The appointment of a Guardian under a Will only takes effect if:- (i) The Appointer has a sole residence order in their favour at the time of their death; or (ii) No parent with parental responsibility survived the Appointer. Even if these conditions are not fulfilled the Appointee will have parental responsibility by virtue of the nomination under the Will and will be entitled to apply to the Court to be appointed as the Guardian. Where there was a sole Residence Order in favour of the Appointer at the time of their death and there is a surviving parent who either does nor does not have parental responsibility that person can seek to have the appointment of the Guardian revoked. Thus had Michael Jackson and his children been resident in England at the time of his death then unless there was a sole Residence Order in his favour at the time of his death his mother would have to have made an application to the Court to be appointed Guardian of his children. In the absence of such an application the children would have to be returned to their mothers to care for them provided that they as surviving parents still had parental responsibility.
See more here:
Michael Jackson names his Mother as his children’s guardian in his Will - but what is the law regarding guardianship and parental responsibility…
Author: Julie Gingell On a hot July 1st, whilst Andy Murray was busy dispatching Juan Carlos Ferrero at Wimbledon, teams strode proudly onto Porters Park Golf Course in Shenley to face off in an equally prestigious event. Well… almost equally prestigious. It was the SA Law Charity Golf Day. This year, the intrepid players raised a stunning £1,000 for the Willow Foundation, the national charity that provides special days out for seriously ill 16 to 40 year-olds. Celebrating their tenth anniversary this year, this Hatfield-based charity was set up by Arsenal legend Bob Wilson and his wife in memory of their daughter Anna, who died of cancer aged just 31. The Charity Golf Day 2009 individual winners were: First Place: David Williams (CEO, the Willow Foundation) Second Place: Clive Pearce (Fundraiser, the Willow Foundation) Third Place: Anthony Kent (Maidment Judd) Longest Drive: Paul Smith (Handelsbanken) Nearest the Pin: Mark Stretton (ITV) Winners of the team event were: Anthony Kent (Maidment Judd) Adam Norton (Welbeck Investments) Toby Murray (Strutt & Parker) Rob Storey (RBS/NatWest) We are planning further fundraising events for the charity later in the year. The ‘Smart Alec’s’ Quiz Night 2009 will be held in the autumn, and an SA Law team will also be entering ‘The Willow 10K’ – a running event held in the majestic setting of Hatfield Park surrounding historic Hatfield House. For more information on how you can raise funds for the Willow Foundation contact Caz Eagles on 01707 259777.
Go here to read the rest:
Charity Golf Day
Until December 2008, responsibility for the Statute Law Database lay with the Statutory Publications Office (SPO), part of the Ministry of Justice. In 2008 the decision was taken to merge the SPO into OPSI and to bring the online legislative services together, creating a single place where visitors could access the widest range of legislative content held by the government alongside supporting material.
See original here:
Improving legislation on the web
My father leases a warehouse unit to a company, recently there was a fire in an adjoining unit and my father’s warehouse sustained what appears to be some water damage by the firefighters attempts to stop the fire spreading. The tenant used the premises to store fabrics which subsequently have been water damaged. The fire occured on the 22nd April 2009 and since that date has not paid rent on the instructions of his insurers’. The warehouse is full of water damaged fabrics and the tenant has not had is claim decided, in the meanwhile my father is not receiving any rent. The License expires on the 7th August 2009, can my father insist that the property be returned to him on this date free of any of the tenants goods? Any advice would be much appreciated.
Read more from the original source:
Warehouse Insurance Problem
