This Practice Note addresses the issues arising out of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980) in relation to tort claims. It sets out the limitation period for actions founded on tort with reference to joint tortfeasors, concurrent duties between contract and tort claims, contingent damage, continuing wrongs and latent damage. For more general guidance concerning limitation, see: Limitation—overview and Practice Notes: • Limitation Act 1980—general application • Limitation—the principal limitation periods Initial considerations A tort consists of ‘a breach of duty which gives a private law right to the party injured to recover compensatory damages at common law from the party causing the injury’ (SAAMCO). In the event that you have an action founded on a tort, the limitation period will be six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued (LA 1980, s 2). Note that the terms of LA 1980, s 2 are widely drawn and are capable of applying to new rights, which are most likely to be statutory claims that the courts classify as a tort. In Factortame

A reduction in the employee's working hours will usually be a variation of the terms of the employment contract. There may be exceptions to this, eg in the case of a zero-hours contract where the employer has the right to vary hours of work. A purported variation of a contract of employment that is, or will be, transferred under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE 2006) is void 'if the sole or principal reason for the variation is the transfer'. However, a variation is permitted in two situations: • where: ◦ the sole or principal reason for the variation is an economic, technical, or organisational (ETO) reason entailing changes in the workforce, and ◦ the employer and employee agree to the variation • where the terms of that contract permit the employer to make such a variation If the terms of the employment contract permit the employer to make the reduction in working hours,

Dismissal of an employee by their employer will typically be at the instigation of the employer. In other words, the employer will terminate the contract of employment by their words or actions. That will amount to what is usually called an express dismissal. There may be circumstances, however, where the employer does not terminate the contract but behaves in such a way as to entitle the employee to resign and to claim that they have effectively been dismissed as a result of the employer’s bad conduct. A resignation in such circumstances may amount to a constructive dismissal. There are three essential requirements for a constructive dismissal: • there must be an actual or anticipatory breach of contract by the employer which is a fundamental or repudiatory breach, ie one that goes to the root of the contract so as to be sufficiently serious to justify the employee's resignation • the employee must resign in response to the breach, rather than for some other reason • the employee must not delay too long in terminating

This Practice Note is for use when determining applicable law where the contract was entered into on or after 1 January 2021. For contracts entered into before 1 January 2021, a different applicable law regime will be applied by the UK courts. Which regime is applied depend on the date on which the contract was entered into. For guidance on the different regimes and their interrelationship, see Practice Note: Applicable law regimes. This Practice Note refers to UK Rome I, Regulation (EC) 593/2008. This regulation is applied when determining applicable law in cases in which the contract was entered into on or after 1 January 2021. Originally known as Retained Rome I, since 1 January 2024 it is known as Assimilated Rome I—the change is to the name only and not the provisions within the regulation. Authorities may refer to the regulation using either name and so, for ease of reference, the regulation is referred to as UK Rome I in this Practice Note. For information on assimilated

This Practice Note was written in partnership with Angharad Parry of Twenty Essex. This Practice Note is for use when determining applicable law where the contract was entered into between 17 December 2009 and 31 December 2020. For contracts entered into on different dates, a different applicable law regime will be applied by the UK courts. Which regime will apply will depend on the date on which the contract was entered into. For guidance on the different regimes and their interrelationship, see Practice Note: Applicable law regimes. This Practice Note considers the provisions in Regulation (EC) 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) dealing with the freedom of the parties to choose the applicable law for their contract. When choosing an applicable law, the parties are still bound by specific requirements which are considered in this Practice Note. The regulation sets out a number of exceptions as to when it does not apply. For

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: On 6 April 2020, the Employment Rights (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/731 extend the right to a written statement of employment particulars to all categories of 'worker', not just 'employees'. With effect from the same date the Employment Rights (Employment Particulars and Paid Annual Leave) (Amendment) Regulations 2018, SI 2018/1378, make that right apply when an individual starts work (ie a day 1 right) and require further information to be included in the particulars including the days of the week required to be worked (and details of any variation to that), details of any terms and conditions relating to any paid leave plus particulars of any other benefits, any probationary period and training. For more information, see our reports: LNB News 18/12/2018 123 and LNB News 19/12/2018 122. See also Practice Note: Written statements of employment particulars and Checklist—section 1 ERA 1996 written statement requirements. ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note considers the right to a written statement of particulars of employment, under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996), until 5 April 2020

For the purpose of this Q&A we have assumed that the contract is a business-to-consumer contract. This Q&A considers cancellation rights (ie cooling off periods) under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (CCR 2013), SI 2013/3134 only. CCR 2013, SI 2013/3134 set out consumer cancellation rights in respect of doorstep and distance contracts, among other things. CCR 2013, SI 2013/3134 do not specifically address how cancellation rights are affected or apply in the event a contract is transferred between consumers. However, the European Commission's guidance on Directive 2011/83/EU, Consumer Rights Directive (implemented into UK law for the most part by CCR 2013, SI 2013/3134) provides, at paragraph 2.7 (Transfer of existing contracts between consumers): 'Article 3(5) states that “This Directive shall not affect national general contract law such as the rules

This Precedent is a basic-form written statement of the particulars of employment for an employee, containing the particulars required to be given under section 3(1A) of the TE(I)A 1994 (IRL). For a more comprehensive contract of employment for a junior employee, including basic terms relating eg to bonus, expenses, and confidential information, see Precedent: Ireland—Employment contract basic version. Apprentices are ‘employees’ for these purposes. A written statement of employment particulars must be given to every employee within five days of commencement of employment (this is commonly known as a ‘Day 5 Statement’). A written statement of employment particulars (over and above those given in a Day 5 Statement) must be given to every employee within one month of commencement of employment. . Where the employer fails to issue the employee with a written statement, an inspector (as defined in section 2 of Workplace Relations Act 2015 (Ireland)) can give a determination to the employer to comply with the provision specified in the direction. An employer who: • without reasonable cause, fails to provide an employee

We have assumed that the deposit is held by the stakeholder as escrow agent. When an insolvency office-holder is appointed they take control of the company's assets, usually with a view to realising them in order to make a distribution to creditors. The terms of

The cancellation rights set out in the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, SI 2013/3134 (CCR 2013) are subject to the exclusions set out in CCR 2013, SI 2013/3134, regs 6, 27(2)–(3) and 28. In particular, CCR 2013, SI 2013/3134, reg 28(1)(h) states that the cancellation rights do not apply to: ‘…the supply of accommodation, transport of goods, vehicle rental services,

Risk management for a transport project is the process of identifying, scrutinizing and taking steps to counter and mitigate risk factors that may arise throughout the life of the project. It focuses on risks that may materialise in each of the project's planning, implementation and operational phases. Risk management seeks to control or influence events (usually detrimental but occasionally beneficial) that may occur in the future and impact the project. It requires a proactive rather than a reactive approach. This Practice Note seeks to highlight some of the key areas of focus for managing identified risks which must be addressed in the matrix of project contract documents (such as changes to contract terms, default by a sub-contractor or the contractor itself). It considers some suggested risk management approaches and contractual tools that may be used to address the impact of certain risks. It is very high level in nature and is not a comprehensive review of project risks or their management. Risk register It is important that those promoting the project identify and

This Q&A assumes that your query relates to a scenario in which a contractor has been engaged under a ‘traditional’ form of building contract—ie a contract under which it is to provide workmanship and materials, without any express obligation to design any part of the works. There are not any cases in which the courts are aware of which have considered whether the term ‘workmanship’ entails any design responsibility, simply as a matter of contractual interpretation. Broadly, however, there may be three scenarios in which a contractor engaged under a traditional contract may have, or assume, some degree of design liability: Temporary works A contractor will normally have design responsibility for the temporary works that it puts in place, before the final design is prepared by the designers and the permanent works are constructed—unless it is obliged to follow the instructions of a third party regarding the temporary works considered. For more information, see Practice Note: Design liability in construction