There are no statutory provisions relating to secondments, therefore ordinary contractual principles will apply and the starting point will be the written agreement, if any, setting out the terms of the secondment. It is clearly preferable for the secondment agreement (or other letter or document setting out the terms of the secondment) to provide that the secondment can be terminated before the end of the term, eg on notice or in specific circumstances, if that is the intention. See: • Checklist—information needed and issues to consider when drafting a secondment agreement, under the heading ‘Duration of the secondment and termination’, and • clause 2.1 of Precedent: Letter—secondment letter (employer—employee) In the absence of any such provision,

This Checklist of resources sets out some of the considerations when drafting, reviewing and negotiating commercial contracts to reflect the restrictions on ipso facto provisions introduced by the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA 2020). Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020—the impact for commercial lawyers CIGA 2020 introduced reforms to the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) including provisions to ensure the continuity of essential supplies and restrict contractual termination provisions on insolvency (so-called ‘ipso facto’ clauses). The provisions that are of most relevance to general commercial practitioners when drafting and negotiating contracts are: • contractual rights to terminate for an insolvency event, or do any other thing as a result of a customer’s insolvency (so-called ‘ipso facto’ clauses) in contracts for the supply of goods and services are no longer effective • the introduction of a company moratorium available to eligible companies to allow companies to formulate restructuring proposals without creditor pressure • the introduction of a restructuring plan, being a formal process to enable companies to cram down dissenting creditors The changes

[Enter name and address of employer] Dear [enter name] Draft approved apprenticeship agreement I enclose a draft apprenticeship agreement for your review.[ You will see that there are some areas in square brackets where I will need your instructions and I have included some optional clauses for you to consider.] Please contact me when you have had a chance to read through the draft so that I can make any further necessary changes. This agreement is an approved apprenticeship agreement for use in England, and is suitable for use where the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IFATE) has published a standard for the occupation. [For a list of standards, see the IFATE page: www.instituteforapprenticeships.org/apprenticeship-standards/.] The agreement does not include clauses that would be suitable for more senior employees, such as more extensive confidentiality obligations and/or post-termination restrictions which limit competitive behaviour after the termination of employment. If the agreement is to be used for an apprentice with atypical working hours or flexible working arrangements, it would require alteration in some respects. An

’Approved English apprenticeships’, which rely on approved apprenticeship standards, were introduced in place of ‘English apprenticeships’, which relied on ‘recognised English frameworks’ with effect from 26 May 2015. For further information, see Practice Note: Apprenticeships—Apprenticeship agreements—ASCLA 2009 (no longer available). An approved English apprenticeship must currently take place under an approved English apprenticeship agreement. There is scope for the Secretary of State to introduce regulations for 'alternative English apprenticeships', however no such regulations have yet been made. For further information, see Practice Note: Apprenticeships—Approved apprenticeship agreements. An approved English apprenticeship agreement must: • provide for a person (‘the apprentice’) to work for another person for reward

Commercial analysis: German fuel distributor, Mabanaft, and its related company, Oiltanking Deutschland, recently suffered a substantial cyber-attack causing significant disruption to their business operations. In response, they declared force majeure on a number of their contracts. Philip Tansley, Partner, and John Shirley-Rakhra, associate, both at Shoosmiths, analyse the effectiveness of force majeure clauses in the event of a cyber-attack.

Public Law analysis: This case concerns a successful application submitted by the contracting authority under regulation 96 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102, to lift the automatic suspension imposed by regulation 95(1), alongside the refusal of a request for an expedited trial by International SOS Assistance UK Ltd (the claimant). The judgment highlights the court’s careful consideration of urgency surrounding the implementation of new arrangements, in this case, the provision of medical services to military personnel overseas. The case provides useful clarification on the factors considered when determining whether to lift an automatic suspension. It highlights the court’s approach in weighing the potential advantages to the contracting authority of lifting the suspension against the interests of the claimant and the wider public in maintaining it, particularly where lifting the suspension could enable the award of a contract offering additional benefits beyond those currently in place. The judgment places a spotlight on the inherent difficulties in assessing damages, noting that such calculations require consideration of complex and uncertain hypothetical scenarios. As a result, the court concluded that damages could not be regarded as an adequate remedy for either the claimant or the contracting authority in this case. Considering then the balance of convenience, Mr Justice Eyre determined that the public interest in implementing the new arrangements promptly, particularly given consideration to the operational readiness and national security concerns, outweighed the claimant’s risk of uncompensated loss, such that the suspension was lifted and the request for expedition refused. Written by Sam Pringle, senior associate and Charlotte Jones, trainee solicitor at DWF Law LLP.

SCHEDULE Bond Number [insert] Dated: Parties 1 The Employer: [insert] incorporated in [England and Wales]. (Company Number [insert]) whose registered office is at [insert] 2 The Contractor: [insert] incorporated in [England and Wales] (Company Number [insert]) whose registered office is at [insert]. 3 The Surety: [insert] incorporated in [England and Wales] (Company Number [insert]) whose registered office is at [insert] (A) The Building Contract: The contract dated [insert] between the Employer and the Contractor for the construction of [insert] (the “Works”) (B) Maximum Bond Amount: The aggregate amount of £[insert] (C) Expiry Date: [The date of practical completion/making good defects of the Works in accordance with the Building Contract] (D) Insolvent/Insolvency: [Insert corresponding definition from Building Contract] This Performance Bond (the “Bond”) comprises the Schedule attached at the beginning of this document and the following terms and conditions. 1 Words and phrases defined in the Schedule shall have the same meaning in these terms and conditions. 2 The Employer has appointed the Contractor to carry out the Works on and subject to the terms of the Building Contract. At the Contractor's request, the Surety has agreed to enter into this Bond. 3 The Surety undertakes to the Employer (subject to other

Coronavirus (COVID-19): In addition to the below content on force majeure generally, see also: • Coronavirus (COVID-19) toolkit—Contracts • Coronavirus (COVID-19) and contractual obligations—checklist together with the Q&As (in the related content pod on the right hand side) for specific guidance on the issues to consider if your contract is impacted by coronavirus. Force Majeure means an event or sequence of events beyond a party’s reasonable control preventing or delaying it from performing its obligations under this Agreement. [Insert circumstance not constituting force majeure eg Inability to pay] is not Force Majeure. Definition—Force Majeure (long form) Force Majeure means any event or sequence of events beyond a party’s reasonable control[ and that could not have been reasonably anticipated or avoided] and

The right to receive a written statement of particulars is given to ‘employees’ (as defined by section 230(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996)) who have worked for one month or more, with the exception of mariners. One relevant consideration is whether a given offshore employee is protected under ERA 1996. ERA 1996 is silent as to its territorial application; this question is considered in the judgment of the House of Lords in Lawson v Serco and subsequent

For the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996), a person's employment (by a particular employer) is presumed to have been continuous unless the contrary is shown. Except as provided in ERA 1996, s 215–217, any week which does not count in computing a period of employment breaks the continuity of the period of

Law360: The government's proposal to void non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) covering alleged harassment and discrimination at work will discourage employers from settling claims, putting more pressure on tribunals and early conciliation services.

Employment analysis: The government has launched a consultation on a new Code of Practice on dismissal and re-engagement, to tackle the controversial use of ‘fire and rehire’ practices to change employees’ terms and conditions of employment. David Whincup, partner at Squire Patton Boggs, discusses the government’s first draft of that Code of Practice.