- Litigation / Dispute Resolution (68)
- Employment (65)
- Real Estate (27)
- Company/Commercial (21)
- Family (14)
- Public Sector/Local Authority (13)
- Banking / Finance (9)
- Tax (9)
- Corporate (8)
- Insolvency & restructuring (7)
- Planning (7)
- Regulatory and compliance (7)
- Construction (6)
- Funds (6)
- Information Technology (6)
- Personal tax / Trusts (6)
- Crime (5)
- Environment (5)
- Financial services (5)
- Charities (4)
- Energy (4)
- Immigration (4)
- Pensions (4)
- Human Rights (3)
- Licensing/Gaming/Betting (3)
- Other (3)
- Business Tax (2)
- Competition/EU (2)
- Healthcare (2)
- Insurance/reinsurance (2)
- Media/Entertainment/Sport (2)
- Clinical/Medical Negligence (1)
- Intellectual Property (1)
- PPP/PFI/Commercial projects (1)
- Privacy and reputation (1)
- Private Client (1)
- Private Equity (1)
- Transport (Including aviation and shipping) (1)
Sort By: Newest first | Oldest first
The EAT has held that where an employer has found an employee to have committed gross misconduct, it is not automatically reasonable to dismiss that employee.
Under English law, all individuals have what is called a ‘domicile’, and not more than one domicile, at any one time.
The Equality Act 2010 contains comprehensive provisions in respect of long-service benefits.
The High Court has ordered some Formula 1 group companies and CVC Capital to give disclosure of documents, notwithstanding that they are not parties to litigation in which the orders were made.
When a limited liability company fails and a director of that business continues to trade under the same or a similar name after its failure, there is often disquiet.
With the surge in social media use over the last few years, there has been an increase in the number of employment cases involving potentially offensive postings on social media sites by employees.
In the case of Toal and another v GB Oils, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decided that it does not.
Expressing offers to settle simply as ‘without prejudice’ or even ‘without prejudice save as to costs’ may not be sufficient to leave the door open for further negotiation.
In an ongoing shareholder dispute over control of the parent company of London hotels, the Court of Appeal has considered the effect of a good faith clause in a Shareholders’ Agreement to be minimal.
The Insolvency Service and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills have published consultations proposing amendments to the regulations affecting insolvency practitioners.
As publicly funded bodies, both academy trusts and governing bodies of maintained schools will need to comply with the provisions of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006.
This briefing note is intended to provide guidance to insolvency practitioners who wish to consider whether to seek repayment on behalf of the company of dividends paid to shareholders.
This note is a reminder of the time limits within which challenges under the Public Contract Regulations 2006 may be brought.
The introduction in the present tax year 2013–14 of a new comprehensive statutory test for residence is an enormously significant step for HMRC to take.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) recently clarified its position on workplace victimisation and dismissal in Woodhouse v West North West Homes Leeds Ltd.
The Court of Appeal has somewhat reluctantly held in Black & Anor v Wilkinson  EWCA Civ 820 that refusing to allow an unmarried gay couple to stay in a double room at a bed and breakfast is direct discrimination.
In Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham and others, the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) held that an employment tribunal could make a costs award that the paying party, in this case the Claimant, could not afford.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has re-written an act of parliament to make it compliant with European law and increased the scope of the duty to consult with unions or employee representatives in a redundancy situation.
In November 2012, Theresa May launched a 10-week consultation on implementing a minimum price of 45p per unit of alcohol and banning multi-purchase deals.
The EAT has considered whether a dismissal was fair in circumstances where the dismissal was necessary because a third party had refused to allow the employee to work for it.