This Practice Note considers the right of employees and workers not to be subjected to a detriment, or dismissed, on certain grounds relating to health and safety in the workplace. It sets out who is protected, the qualifying period of employment, and the specified health and safety grounds, namely health and safety officials, participating in consultations, raising health and safety concerns, leaving work in the face of serious and imminent danger, and taking protective steps to avert serious and imminent danger. It covers selection for redundancy on health and safety grounds, and the remedies available for detriment and unfair dismissal. It also outlines the protections that may apply in relation to whistleblowing and trade union activities. An employee, regardless of length of service, has the right: • not to be subjected to a detriment (eg denied promotion), and • not to be dismissed on various grounds relating to health and safety. A worker, regardless of length of service, has the right not to be subjected to a detriment (eg denied

Under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (HSWA 1974), a number of general duties are imposed to ensure the health and safety of employees and non-employees while at work. It is an offence for failure to comply with these duties and those offences are triable in either the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court. For information on the duties imposed by HSWA 1974, ss 2–7, see Practice Notes: • Failure to carry out health and safety duties under HSWA 1974—offences • Safety and the risk to safety under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 • Employees' duties to take reasonable care for health and safety at work • Directors’ duties for health and safety • Health and safety law and the self-employed This Practice Note focuses on those offences under HSWA 1974 which can only be tried in the magistrates’ courts. Summary only health and safety offences The health and safety offences which can only be tried in the magistrates’ court are: • contravention of provisions relating to the Health

I [insert name of client] of [insert address of client] [[date of birth]]hereby authorise

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: Further to the Government's response to the Ministry of Justice’s and Office of the Public Guardian (OPG)’s consultation Modernising Lasting Powers of Attorney, the Powers of Attorney Bill received Royal Assent on 18 September 2023, becoming the Powers of Attorney Act 2023 (PAA 2023). When it comes into force, PAA 2023 will introduce changes to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) to create a more modern lasting power of attorney (LPA) service. The changes will include: (i) introducing regulations to allow those involved in making an LPA to select whether to sign the LPA digitally or on paper; (ii) removing the ability for attorneys to register an LPA so that only the donor will be permitted to register; (iii) introducing regulations governing identification verification requirements in relation to registration applications; (iv) providing for a single route for registration objections to the OPG and widening the group of people who can lodge an objection to include third parties and not just those named in the LPA; and

Private Client analysis: The Court of Appeal allowed the parents’ appeal and appointed them as HB’s health and welfare deputies, rejecting the restrictive approach that treated personal welfare deputyships as exceptional. The court held that, where family members can communicate with P more effectively than professionals, give proper effect to P’s wishes and feelings, and make a range of recurring non-trivial decisions, deputyship may enhance rather than undermine autonomy and participation. It endorsed Parr, questioned aspects of Lawson, and held that paragraph 8.38 of the Mental Capacity Act Code of Practice is wrong and requires urgent revision. Practitioners should expect a more fact-sensitive, less restrictive approach to welfare deputyship applications. Produced in partnership with Justin Holmes of Radcliffe Chambers.

Health benefits are payments, services or other advantages provided to an individual in respect of their health, typically under an employment contract, insurance policy or statutory scheme. In legal practice, the term commonly covers private medical insurance, dental and optical cover, income protection, critical illness cover, Employee Assistance Programmes, occupational health support and, in some contexts, sick pay and rehabilitation services.“Health benefits” is largely a descriptive, non-technical term rather than a defined expression in UK or Irish primary legislation, although specific component benefits (for example, “sick pay”, “statutory sick pay”, “medical insurance”, “benefits in kind”) are regulated and defined in employment, tax and social security law.The concept is central in drafting employment contracts, staff handbooks, compromise/settlement agreements, insurance policies and pensions and benefits documentation, and is relevant in TUPE/business transfer, redundancy and discrimination claims (particularly disability discrimination and reasonable adjustments). It also has tax implications, including treatment as a benefit in kind.Usage is broadly consistent across England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, subject to jurisdiction-specific statutory schemes and tax rules governing particular health-related benefits.

What is a health care associated infection? Health care associated infections (HCAIs) are any infection contracted: • as a direct result of treatment in, or contact with, a health or social care setting • as a direct result of health care delivery in the community • as a result of an infection originally acquired outside a health care setting (eg in the community) and brought into a health care setting by patients, staff or visitors and transmitted to others within that setting (eg norovirus) There is a (very similar) legal definition in section 20(6) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (HSCA 2008): • ‘health care associated infection’ means any infection to which an individual may be exposed or made susceptible (or more susceptible) in circumstances where: ◦ (a) health or social care is being, or has been, provided to that or any other individual, and ◦ (b) the risk of exposure to the infection, or of susceptibility (or increased susceptibility) to it, is directly or indirectly attributable to the provision of that care See

A health care declaration is a person’s written statement of wishes, values and instructions about future medical treatment, intended to guide or bind clinicians if the person later lacks capacity. The term itself is not a defined legal term; in practice it is used as an umbrella for instruments such as a “living will”, an advance decision to refuse treatment (ADRT), an advance directive, or (in Ireland) an advance healthcare directive.England and Wales: ADRTs are governed by the Mental Capacity Act 2005. A specific refusal of treatment (including life‑sustaining treatment) is legally binding if valid and applicable; life‑sustaining refusals require prescribed formalities. Requests for treatment are not binding but inform best‑interests decisions. Interaction with health and welfare LPAs is subject to MCA precedence rules.Scotland: “Advance directives” are not statutory but are given considerable weight at common law and under the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 principles; they are generally persuasive rather than binding. (Note the separate mental health “advance statement” regime.)Northern Ireland: The Mental Capacity Act (Northern Ireland) 2016 recognises binding advance decisions to refuse treatment on conditions broadly similar to England and Wales.Ireland: The Assisted Decision‑Making (Capacity) Act 2015 provides a statutory Advance Healthcare Directive, including binding refusals (with extra formalities for life‑sustaining treatment) and the option to appoint a Designated Healthcare Representative. Users should keep the document accessible and review or revoke it as circumstances change.

This Practice Note is the first of a series of three Practice Notes on health care procurement introduced by the Provider Selection Regime (PSR) as implemented by the Health Care Services (Provider Selection Regime) Regulations 2023 (PSR Regs 2023), SI 2023/1348, as amended, which came into force on 1 January 2024. This Practice Note covers: • the ambition of the regime • procurement principles • what services fall within the scope of the PSR • mixed procurement • transparency requirements including recording keeping, and • transitional arrangements for contracts commenced prior to the coming into force of the PSR regime PSR Regs 2023 govern and update health care procurement by replacing the previous procurement rules for NHS and local authority funded health care services contained in: • the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102 (now replaced by the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023)), and • the National Health Service (Procurement, Patient Choice and Competition) (No 2) Regulations 2013, SI 2013/500 with PSR Regs 2023. PSR Regs

This Practice Note is the third of a series of three Practice Notes on health care procurement introduced by the Provider Selection Regime (PSR) as implemented by the Health Care Services (Provider Selection Regime) Regulations 2023 (PSR Regs 2023), SI 2023/1348, which came into force on 1 January 2024. This Practice Note covers: • standstill period • contract award • contract modifications • urgent awards/modifications • contract management, and • termination Standstill period A contract procured using the: • direct award process C • most suitable provider process • competitive process, or • framework agreement must not be entered before the end of the standstill period. The standstill period begins the day after the notice of intention to make award is published on the central digital platform. It must last for a minimum of eight working days. This delay is to give a service provider who is either aggrieved or believes that PSR Regs 2023 have not been complied with the opportunity to make written representations to the ‘relevant authority’ (RA) particularising

This Practice Note is the second of a series of three Practice Notes on health care procurement introduced by the Provider Selection Regime (PSR) as implemented by the Health Care Services (Provider Selection Regime) Regulations 2023 (PSR Regs 2023), SI 2023/1348, which came into force on 1 January 2024. This Practice Note explains the procurement processes available to relevant authorities involved in planning, purchasing, and delivering of health and care services, namely the: • direct award process—which is subdivided into three forms of direct award • most suitable provider process • competitive process as well as covering the mandatory procedural requirements for all procurements. It also covers the additional considerations for relevant authorities when making contract awards using any process other than direct award processes A and B, namely the: • Basic selection criteria • Key criteria • Exclusions • Conflicts of interest The statutory guidance on PSR Regs 2023 requires relevant authorities to undertake reasonable and proportionate due diligence on providers. Relevant authorities are expected to consider whether the providers they want

This Practice Note provides practical guidance on the health certification requirements for the importation into the UK of medium-risk animal products, certain plants and plant products, composite products and high-risk food and feed of non-animal origin exported from the EU as from 31 January 2024. Introduction When the UK exited the EU’s customs union in 2020, the UK had to establish its own border arrangements to deal with imports from the EU. This obligation arose on 1 January 2021. As from this date, UK products imported into the EU have been subject to full EU border controls. However, the UK did not implement any border controls on EU imports until 1 January 2022. For guidance on the border controls that were introduced, see Practice Note: New UK border control with the EU as from 1 January 2022. The UK’s intention was to impose border controls with the EU in a staged approach to allow UK businesses time to adapt to the changes. The UK postponed the implementation of the