This Q&A assumes that there is no need to give consideration to claims for equal pay or unlawful deduction from wages. Employers generally agree the basic rate and frequency at which they will pay their employees. Under section 1 and section 4 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, any details agreed at the start of the employment should be included in the employee’s written statement of particulars, as should any changes subsequently agreed (see Practice Note: Written

Depending on the nature of the new issue/ground for termination that has occurred after service of the default notice specifying the contractor's failure to proceed regularly and diligently, the employer may have two options to consider as to how it might proceed. The JCT Design and Build Contract 2011 Edition provides as follows at Clause 8.3: ‘8.3.1 The provisions of clauses 8.4 to 8.7 are without prejudice to any other rights and remedies of the Employer. The provisions of clauses 8.9 and 8.10 and (in the case of termination under either of those clauses) the provisions of clause 8.12, are without prejudice to any other rights and remedies of the Contractor.’ The effect of this

The first step is to establish whether such a benefit would be taxed as general earnings, as explained in Practice Note: How employment income is taxed—non-cash earnings or benefits. Assuming that it would not, it is then necessary to whether the benefit is brought into charge as a payment or benefit received in connection with the termination of employment which are not

An employer may ‘recognise’ a trade union for a number of different purposes, and at one of a number of different ‘levels’. Where a union has negotiating rights under the highest level of recognition, decisions on matters covered by those rights must be agreed bilaterally by the employer and the union, and may not be taken by the employer alone. This is also usually referred to as recognition for collective bargaining. For further information, see Practice Note: Trade union recognition, under the main section dealing with ‘Levels of trade union recognition’. It is important to note that it is only this highest level of recognition, ie recognition for collective bargaining, that is treated as recognition in law under the Trade

Competition analysis: In a landmark decision that agreed with the prior opinion of Advocate General Emiliou, the Court of Justice dealt a fatal blow to the expanded application of Article 22 of the EU Merger Regulation (EUMR). The Court of Justice held that the mechanism did not permit Member States to refer proposed acquisitions that fall below the national jurisdictional thresholds to the European Commission (Commission) for review. In the short term, the decision deprives the Commission of a key tool in its ability to police potentially problematic transactions, including so-called ‘killer acquisitions’. For Illumina v Grail, this decision overturns the General Court’s judgment and annuls the Commission’s decision to prohibit its US$7.1bn acquisition. It is significant because it restores certainty as to when the Commission may scrutinise deals that are beyond the scope of the EUMR and Member State merger control thresholds. Written by Timothy McIver, partner at Debevoise & Plimpton LLP.

Commercial analysis: The High Court has levelled serious criticism at the practice of undisclosed commissions given to mortgage brokers. The court held that an undisclosed commission from lender to broker (borrower to broker either was disclosed or wasn’t an issue) was not merely ‘half secret’ commission, but a secret commission or a ‘bribe’ (see para [18]). The result of having an undisclosed commission from lender to broker was to invalidate the mortgage. That is a dramatic outcome which will be of concern to the vast majority of lenders and of tactical value to a large number of litigants. The case also acts as a stark reassertion of the importance of, and the willingness of the court to recognise, fiduciary duties. The lower court had considered, but dismissed a fiduciary duty arising between a borrower and a broker. This case is a reminder that the High Court will recognise them. Written by Steven Barrett, commercial chancery barrister, at Radcliffe Chambers.

Property Disputes analysis: The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against the rejection of a high value claim under the tenancy deposit legislation. The appeal turned on whether a certificate containing prescribed information which (1) contained an error, and (2) was unsigned, was nonetheless sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirements within section 213 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004), and the ancillary 2007 Order. The court concluded it was, by application of the Mannai principle and a purposive interpretation of the statutory requirements. This decision will be of great interest to all residential landlord and tenant practitioners. Written by Shomik Datta, barrister at Cornerstone Barristers.

It is assumed for the purposes of this Q&A that the enduring power of attorney (EPA) provided for the attorneys to act jointly and severally, since the appointment of B has taken effect. If B can act as attorney, it may not be of great importance

This Q&A considers a landlord’s ability to deal with their premises following service of a notice under section 13 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993). Service of a section 13 notice triggers a statutory procedure by which the tenants of flats may collectively acquire the freehold interest in their premises. The tenants’ rights arising under the notice should be protected by the registration of an agreed or unilateral notice against the freehold title (or a class C(iv) land charge if the landlord’s title is unregistered). This is expressly provided for

For the purpose of preventing the title of a transferee of registered land being questioned, a person’s right to exercise an owner’s powers in relation to a registered estate is to be taken to be free from any limitation affecting the validity of the disposition which is not reflected by an entry on the register or imposed by or under Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) see LRA 2002, s 26. Therefore, a sale by a mortgagee under

When a claimant is successful in claiming compensation as a result of an accident, the National Health Service (NHS) is entitled to recover an amount to cover the cost of the claimant's NHS hospital treatment and any ambulance costs. Recovery of these NHS charges falls to the Compensation Recovery Unit (CRU), which will in turn refund the charges to the relevant hospital or ambulance service. For more information, see Practice Note: Recovery of NHS charges. Where the injured party was involved in

The Practice Note: Payment of legacies sets out that a specific legacy is a gift of a particular property forming part of the testator’s estate. As set out in the commentary: To a debtor: Williams on Wills [30.10]: ‘[The] general principle [is that] a legatee is not entitled to receive out of the testator's estate any benefit without bringing into account money owing by him to the testator. This is in the nature of a right of set-off (see Cherry v Boultbee), and, as prima facie only money can be set off against money, the principle applies only to money