Helping a charity understand TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings) for their local authority contracts by Gemma Ospedale, Employment

Certitude is a charity based in Balham which runs mental health and learning disabilities social care services.

I was asked by their senior staff, directors and HR personnel at the charity to help them understand more about TUPE* and related employment law. They tender for a lot of work with local authorities and they needed a comprehensive overview of how TUPE operates, together with practical advice and guidance on how to deal with new staff coming in from local authority services and other social care organisations.

Naturally, there are also concerns about budget constraints and the necessary restructuring which often has to happen as a result of these tendering processes where staff are transferred through TUPE. It is increasingly the case that when they tender for a piece of work (and this applies to all social care organisations) they have to run the service on a reduced budget from that which was given to the previous service provider. Therefore they have to consider how best to run the service and whether they need to restructure to provide the services differently.

If staff come over under TUPE the new employers are restricted in what they can and cannot do because of the law. What they wanted was practical guidance on how they can undertake restructuring and change terms and conditions, lawfully under TUPE.

I designed and delivered an interactive seminar for them – conveying the law but in the context of their situation and providing lots of practical advice. I took them through the latest case law on economic, technical and organisational reasons entailing changes in workforce, which can be a defence to dismissals or changes to terms and conditions which happen in connection with a transfer. I also guided them through how to identify whether staff are "assigned" to the service transferring.

We had an interesting and lively debate throughout the seminar. My talk used slides to help them assimilate all the information, examples and advice and welcomed questions throughout. At the end of each session, morning and afternoon, there was a case study with several questions based on the topics we covered during that session. Again, this engendered a lot of interesting comments and discussions on the solutions.

One of the comments which came at the end from their HR director was that it would be a useful talk for social care organisations generally because they are all involved in tendering with local authorities. If any other social care organisations would be interested in a similar event, please let me know – email gdo@royds.com.

* What is TUPE? The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations (TUPE) protects employees' terms and conditions of employment when a business is transferred from one owner to another, or the provision of a service changes provider, either to another organisation or back in house to the original contractor. Employees of the previous owner when the business changes hands automatically become employees of the new employer on the same terms and conditions. It's as if their employment contracts had originally been made with the new employer. Their continuity of service and any other rights are all preserved. Both old and new employers are required to inform and consult employees affected directly or indirectly by the transfer (Source: ACAS)

‘Royds solicitors keep fit and have fun with five-a-side football in Green Park’ by Fiona Aitken

In making use of London’s plentiful parks and long summer evenings Carter Lane’s sporting elite, disguised as Lawyers of Royds LLP, headed out last night to Green Park for a bit of friendly five aside football.

The dribbling skills honed in boyhood clearly came in handy for the male half of the participants although arguably Alex’s Year 2 ballet lessons gave her high kicks a kind of grace not even Roberto Rivelino could surpass.

The pros Paul and Stephen shrewdly can not only actually play football but carried out a series of tactical calls which meant they both seemed to know what the other was doing – sneaky.

Frank’s initial desire to keep order and play by some rules was soon filed for another day and while he had concerns about having not played since the days of a leather lace up ball he did an outstanding job playing uphill much of the time thanks to our pitch which sat at approximately 5 %.

Playing in goal, Cheryl received man of the match (no PC gender neutrality here) although she has some work to do before she pulls off a Rene Higuita Scorpion save – that said I’d like to see him play like that in high heels.

While on the subject of the team’s wardrobe (this is a female author after all) it was good to see Chris playing in his suit (trouble when he gets home with grass stains on that one…) and he was even game enough to play barefoot.

Mark quietly put away a series of goals beaten only by the youth of the pack Tim, who scored so many goals we lost count. Lucy, still carrying injuries from the Extreme 5 a few weeks ago, deftly ducked and dived, dodged and weaved, sometimes even with the football at her feet. Helen’s enthusiasm and desire to extend the length of the pitch was soon quelled after one sprint up the far side and Fiona did nothing but make a lot of noise, kick Paul in the shins and caused a passing two year old, who simply wanted to join in, cry. Nice.

On reflection the rules were minimalist to say the least. Having carried out some research we may want to lay down some guiding principles for the next match. It seems the Football Association considers disciplinary action is required:

If a player commits any of the following offences in a manner considered by
the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

• attempts to kick or trip an opponent.
• jumps at, pushes, holds or charges an opponent (even with the shoulder).
• strikes or attempts to strike an opponent.
• spits at an opponent.
• slides in an attempt to play the ball when it is being played or attempted to be
played by an opponent (sliding tackle).
• handles the ball deliberately, except for the goalkeeper in his penalty area.

While it should be made very clear there was absolutely no spitting nor Wayne Rooney style foul language, the same can not necessarily be said for the other noted infringements - and that was just the girls…

Thanks to everyone that made the effort to come and join in. All those that genuinely had work to do or went home to watch Coronation Street missed out. Till next time.

‘The UK Jewellery Awards 2011’ by Stephen Welfare

The UK Jewellery Awards 2011 at the Grosvenor House Hotel on July 14th recognised and celebrated the industry’s finest talent.

The event was brought by Retail Jeweller Magazine and hosted by celebrity TV presenter and model, Lisa Snowdon. Royds’ clients and contacts were once again well represented amongst the finalists, but sadly no winners.

The finalists:

Platinum Bridal Collection of the year
Sarah Jordan

Supplier of the year
Gecko
IBB
The Dreyfuss Group

Jewellery Designer of the year
SHO Fine Jewellery

Jewellery Brand of the year
Chamilia Europe

The finalists and winners were chosen by a panel of 32 judges scrutinising entry packs and examples of jewellery, and in some categories following an interview and questioning process.

Congratulations to all our clients. We look forward to meeting with you at IJL in September.

‘Harrogate’s 50th Giftware Trade Show’ by Stephen Welfare

The Harrogate Giftware Trade Show turned 50 years old this year so I headed north last weekend to join the 900 odd exhibitors braving a very wet Yorkshire summer. I have not been to Harrogate Home and Gift for many years so I was interested to see if things had changed. The layout was much as I remembered, with exhibiting space spread out across a number of locations in the town centre. The Majestic Hotel dominates the scene, with four marquee halls erected in the grounds, more marquees in and around the Cairn Hotel along with several halls in the Harrogate International Centre.

Royds’ clients were located variously at the different venues representing the diverse mixture of products being show cased, from premier design led gifts company East of India in the design point marquee, to ceramics company DRH Collection Limited, other giftware clients and our many jewellery clients in the International Centre. Plenty of exercise as ever for your roving IP lawyer, and more than the one soaking by the rain in the process!

Harrogate still has a local feel to it. It has nothing like the scale or sophistication of Spring Fair or IJL. Unfortunately the poor weather put the dampeners on the celebrated social scene; the PIMMS tent and many outside catering establishments were unused. Whilst the summer fun and gaiety was missing, business continued regardless.

Royds’ client Instant Gifts International commented that Sunday and Monday trading was up on the previous year, and across the show visitor traffic was brisk. Reflecting the continuing economic uncertainty in commerce, at present, requests for legal advice were as much if not more about recovery of debt than protecting intellectual property.

As with other trade shows Harrogate offered free seminars and retail surgeries including a talk by Mike Josypenko of BJ & GI on sourcing from China. Royds are pleased to provide advice and assistance to BJ & GI on international and intellectual property issues.

So not a lot of change then, and typical “up north” weather. Bring on IJL in the “beautiful south” in September!

Royds participates in the Extreme 5 Challenge to raise money for charity: ‘John Wayne and True Grit’ by Fiona Aitken

After months of training (not really), blood (really), sweat (lots) and tears (just a few), two Royds teams completed the Extreme 5 Challenge on Sunday 10th July. The event comprised of a fundraising challenge followed by a relay race involving a 1.5km swim, a 10km kayak, a 40km cycle and a 10km run.

Having left London at silly o’clock on the Sunday morning, Mother Nature was kind and the teams arrived at Willen Lake in Milton Keynes to glorious sunshine. With the fundraising in the bag (more about that later) and four challenges ahead, everyone was quietly focused on their own discipline; presumably picturing the finish, the inevitable glory and trying really very hard to ignore the competition who all somehow seemed to be from the buff, Lycra clad, aerodynamic-cycle-helmet-wearing section of society. Even down to Union jack embossed kayaks (!). It was all just scare tactics surely?

At 9am sharp, swimmers Helen and Fiona tippy-toed into the goose poop infested waters doing their upmost to look glamorous in tight fitting wetsuits and bearing in mind the calls of “keep your mouth shut girls” being the advice from safety conscious HR on dry land (thanks Cheryl). A sharp blow of the horn induced a flurry of splashing from approximately 30 competitors and after receiving a couple of friendly competitive blows to the head each, both Helen and Fiona emerged from the water to tag the kayakers.

It soon became clear Lucy had been given the dodgy wheeled shopping trolley version of a kayak. Once she had finished impressing us all with her 360 spins (of which we note the Union jack embossed crew achieved none), she powered round 10kms – yes 10 kms - of lake. Hats go off to her for this massive effort and all were pleased to hear we were not penalised for returning the paddle with smatterings of blood. She is now known on Carter Lane as ‘Lucy True Grit Hollis’.

Next came 40kms of cycle power as Mark and Jack used every inch of their lawyering logic to avoid being outsmarted by the local youths who had moved the signs meaning the cycle course was slightly different for each competitor. In addition, nimble fingered Mark clearly has been taking notes from McLaren as he fixed a puncture in just six minutes and continued in the race as if nothing had happened. Jack on the other hand got a puncture in the first 20 yards (give me some poetic licence here) yet continued for 2 hours and 16 minutes on a gravel track to complete his section of the race, with no water, long trousers and a completely flat tyre! John Wayne is a big girls blouse compared to Jack; however they now both have a similar gait.

Finally the run. Naomi and Cheryl were up against it due to aforementioned equipment failures – what is it they say about a workman and his tools? But they both flew round, Cheryl heeding her previous advice about keeping her mouth shut and Naomi wishing she had as she swallowed a swarm of flies.

As the sun set on what turned out to be an eventful day, the teams enjoyed a cool beer, a BBQ and that warm fuzzy feeling of achieving something worthy of a mention around the water cooler at work next week.

On a sincere note, however, the teams would like to thank all those who supported the cause as having raised over £400 in aid of Homes in Zimbabwe and Ndoro. 8 members of the Royds fraternity completed all five challenges in a style of their own.

'Employment Law Seminar and Workshop' by Gemma Ospedale, 6th July 2011

Last week saw a gathering of current and potential future Royds clients, as speakers Gemma Ospedale, Helen Murphie and Hannah May conducted an Employment Law Update Seminar and Workshop.

As many employers are well aware employment legislation appears to be in a continual state of flux. Keeping fully abreast of developments often proves to be time consuming and not always that interesting. Even for the most diligent of employers, maintaining a firm grasp of employment law often fails to be a reality.

By focusing on six keys areas and preparing a workshop and questions and answers session the Royds speakers broke through some of the mist that shrouds these developments. Attendees for example now have the confidence, even without ‘A’ level maths, to calculate Additional paternity leave entitlements. Further feedback showed the speakers even managed to be entertaining - although a ‘sugar high’ following afternoon tea and the promise of a glass or two of wine post seminar may have contributed to that!

The topics covered were:

1. Agency Workers Regulations
2. Additional Paternity Leave and Pay
3. Holiday Sickness
4. Equality Act 2010
5. Compulsory Retirement
6. Right to Legal Representation

By no means will this seminar be a one off event, as areas of future interest might include the Bribery Act, flexible working hours and TUPE.

Should other employers feel they or their management teams might like to attend any future seminar please contact Gemma Ospedale at gdo@royds.com.

Family wealth under continued pressure by Deanna Hurst, 4th July 2011

An article entitled “Families just £1 richer than in 2004” in today’s City AM newspaper caught my eye. It was reporting on a Westminster Think Tank presentation today that shows the average household’s weekly income measured £682 in 2004-2005 and just £683 in 2009-10 in numbers adjusted for inflation. Sir Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England, suggested in the article that we are presently experiencing the biggest income squeeze on families since the 1920s.

With inflation running at 4.5% in the UK (compared to Europe at 3.2%) – whilst the target is 2% - things are hardly likely to get better in the short term.

And on the assets front things are barely much better – despite interest rates being held at their lowest level (0.5%) for some time one of the main barometers of UK wealth – house prices – remains stubbornly low. Recent reports show mortgage approvals are running at half of pre-crisis levels and unsold homes are piling up. Meanwhile, property values fell 4.2% in the three months to May 2011 compared to the same period in 2010.

This means that increasingly families are looking at short term financial survival over their long term family wealth and prosperity. Worrying times indeed.

Need new business premises? - What are your options? Mark Newbold (Commercial Property)

Most businesses rent premises from a landlord. You can do this either under a licence or a lease.

Licence - This is usually a short-term arrangement. Your landlord can enter the premises at will, and require you to move out at short notice.

Lease - A lease is longer-term arrangement. Aside from access for repairs, ordinarily you will have exclusive use of the premises, and you have the right to remain for the duration of the lease.

What will I have to pay?
Once you are in occupation and have paid any upfront costs such as agent’s and solicitor’s fees, you will usually have to pay the following:

Rent - This can be payable monthly or quarterly, and the amount will be set out in your lease. You should also be aware that many leases contain provisions for the rent to be reviewed at certain times, and this may mean that the rent increases.

Service charges - Usually, the landlord is responsible for maintaining the building and insuring it, and will pass a share of this cost on to you by way of service charges. Often, the charge is estimated, and you will have to pay in advance. At the end of the year, if the actual cost is more, you may have to top up the payment; if it is less, the difference between the two is usually carried over to reduce your payment for the following year. You should make sure that you see evidence of previous year’s charges.

I need to move. What can I do?
When you enter into a lease, you are agreeing to occupy and pay rent for a fixed period. Leases can contain options for you leave early, rent the premises to someone else or pass the lease on to another tenant.

Leaving early - Some leases contain what is known as a break clause allowing the tenant to give notice at certain times. If you wish to take advantage of such a clause, you must be extremely careful. You must give notice at exactly the right time, and you must make sure that all rent and other charges owing are paid. If you do not, the break clause will fail, and you will have to stay and continue to pay rent and service charges.

Renting to someone else - This is known as sub-letting, and although someone else will be paying rent, you remain responsible to the landlord for all sums owing; if your sub-tenant does not pay, you will have to. You must get the landlord’s approval in writing to sub-let, and often, the landlord can refuse if they do not think the new tenant is suitable.

Passing the lease on - This is known as assigning the lease, and although the lease will be transferred into someone else’s name, the landlord will usually require you to guarantee the rent and other charges. As before, you will have to get approval in writing from the landlord.

With all of the above options, the landlord can usually require you to pay his professional fees; these normally include surveyor’s and solicitor’s fees.

My lease is nearly up. Can I stay on?
Under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, tenants have the right to a new lease except under certain circumstances, for instance the landlord may be intending to redevelop the site.

You do need to be careful, however, because it is possible to sign away your rights when you enter the lease. This is known as ‘contracting out of the Act’, and you will be giving up any right to remain if you do so.

My lease is up and I am leaving. Are there any additional costs?
This is another area where you need to be extremely careful. Leases can contain provisions that will require you to put the premises back into the condition they were in when you occupied. This can mean removing anything you have done and repairing and redecorating the premises, and can be a substantial amount.

The term used for this is dilapidations, and if the lease has such provisions, you should make sure that there is evidence of the condition of the premises attached to the lease before you sign it.

There is a problem with the building. What can I do?
In return for you paying the rent and service charges, your landlord is agreeing to look after the building. This is, however, an area where tenants should be careful, as most leases specifically provide that tenants cannot withhold rent.

What should I do next?
Once you have identified suitable premises, you should seek legal advice from an experienced property solicitor. As you can see from the very short summaries above, there are costs and liabilities that may not be obvious, and these can trap the unwary. You should not sign anything without taking advice, as you could end up having to pay far more than you thought, both during the term of the lease, and when it ends. For a confidential chat, without obligation, please give me a call.

This article appears in Royds "London Business Adviser" newsletter which you can access at http://www.royds.com/pdf/TheLondonBusinessAdviser_Spring_2011.pdf

Insolvency Curry Club by David Bowman, Dispute Resolution Department

A further gathering of curry-loving junior insolvency professionals and Royds lawyers took place on 31st March 2011 at the Bengal Tiger – which is just a few yards from the Royds offices in Carter Lane, near St Paul’s. The revellers included members of the Royds litigation and property teams along with guests from leading accountants and insolvency practitioner firms. It was another great social event and our thanks to all those who came along.

We have great ambitions for the Curry Club (particularly as there are so many great places to eat in the City) and hope that it will become a quarterly event for juniors working in the insolvency, accountancy and legal sectors in the South East to meet socially. An obsessive love of Eastern cuisine and Cobra beer is not compulsory but is an advantage!

Club membership is free but on an invitation basis but anyone working in the insolvency sector is encouraged to express an interest to come along to the next session due to take place in June/July. Anyone who is interested should contact David Bowman on dab@royds.com. And please don’t worry if you can’t persuade a colleague to come along, we’ll make sure you have several people to chat to.

Data Protection – Will you be fine or fined? By John North, Commercial Department

As there have been numerous press reports about private and public sector organisations being fined for problems with Data Protection, we were recently asked by a client to present a short, practical workshop for its senior managers on the Data Protection Act. Our talk covered the following:

• Overview of the Data Protection principles
• The new fines regime
• Possible issues for all businesses
• The Information Commissioner – powers and actions
• How to protect your business

Amongst the case studies we used to illustrate the potential issues were: misdirected faxes and letters, loss of memory sticks and laptops, the lack of encryption on sensitive data where laptops had been stolen, furniture sold containing files and where papers were found at a recycling centre. We considered both the policy and systems that need to be in place as well as the responsibilities and actions of all employees.

If you would like us to present a similar short session at your business, please get in touch.

Olympic Volunteering by Christopher Hall

HRH Duke of Edinburgh is shown on Christopher Hall's boat Casamajor at the 150th Anniversary celebrations of London Rowing Club on the Thames in June 2006.




As Olympic fever approaches, James Millar Craig and I are waiting with interest to see if we have made it to the interview stage of the volunteer programme. James has highlighted his efficient administrative and car parking skills in the hope of making it to the next phase, while I am sticking closer to my watery habitat by volunteering for work on the rowing lake.

Whilst it is easy to denigrate such a huge amount of investment for a four week sporting event but we can see from the huge anticipation already building up for the one day event at the end of April, how commercially important these games will be for Great Britain. The early completion of the Olympic Stadium has highlighted one of Britain’s main strengths, which is recognised world wide, that we cannot be beaten for organisation and attention to detail.

What is also clear is that in the build up to the games this year, and during the main event the focus of the world will be on London and Great Britain, and more importantly all competing countries will bring large delegations of senior politicians and businessmen who will be looking for opportunities of investment in the United Kingdom.

As part of this process I have also volunteered for the test event at the rowing lake which is the Junior World Championships, which dovetails well with my main hobby of coaching young rowers. I am also involved in the Regatta for the Disabled on 3 September 2011, which allows disabled people to experience rowing for themselves.

Royds LLP, have since its bid stage been an active supporter of the Olympics and Paralympics coming to London. We welcome all queries from investors, participants and spectators for the London 2012 Games.

For further information please contact Christopher Hall on cdh@royds.com or
James Millar Craig on jmc@royds.com or telephone 020 7583 2222

The Bribery Act, corporate hospitality and Olympic tickets by Emma Boulter, Corporate Department

As tickets for the London 2012 Olympics went on sale two weeks ago the general public now has less than a few weeks to place bids for a total of 6.6 million seats. In light of the extensive press coverage that the newly implemented Bribery Act has received, many businesses will no doubt be wondering if they are allowed to place bids for corporate hospitality purposes or if doing so will leave them enjoying the games from behind bars.

The Bribery Act applies to all everyday business trading activities however large or small operating within the UK, whether the organisations are incorporated in the UK or not and whether in the public or private sector. Over the course of and in the run up to the games the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) will be monitoring business activities for suspicious transactions but Richard Alderman, director of the SFO, has said, "Sensible and proportionate expenditure on hospitality will remain perfectly lawful under the Bribery Act."

Corporate hospitality will inevitably create big business opportunities throughout the games, but any organisation intending to use the Olympics as an opportunity for entertaining must ensure they have adequate procedures in place beforehand in order to avoid criminal liability. Things to be aware of when planning an event include ensuring there is a substantial business element with a legitimate goal, be transparent and document proposed events carefully, be aware of the value and the associated expenses of this sort of entertainment and ensure these are proportionate to the proposed business.

Implement good procedures, be aware of the restrictions and place your bids! The bidding closes at 11.59pm on 26 April 2011.

There are now 482 days until the games begin! Olympics begin on July 25, 2012.

All Change on Litigation Funding.....

As you may have seen on the news this week the Lord Chancellor, Ken Clarke, has announced his intentions to implement the Jackson Report on litigation funding in a White Paper. These changes affect almost all aspects of contentious case funding and are therefore of interest to commercial and individual clients who are may become involved in disputes before the Courts in near future.

The highlights of the White Paper are as follows:-

•Abolition of the general recoverability of CFA “No Win No Fee” success fees from a losing party – lawyer’s success fees of up to 100% of the legal costs of an action brought under a CFA will in future be paid by the client and not an opponent. This will have a considerable impact on how legal cases are funded.

•Abolition of the general recoverability of “After the Event” legal expenses insurance premiums – all premiums will be paid by the client, except the costs of an expert’s report in clinical negligence cases which will remain recoverable.

•An increase across the board of 10% to non pecuniary damages in tort cases e.g. pain, suffering and loss of amenity in negligence cases.

•Damaged Based Agreements (DBAs) aka Contingency Fees, where lawyer’s fees are funded from a percentage of the damages awarded by the court, shall be lawful. It is not intended by Government that there be a requirement for claimants to take independent legal advice, as there is with say a compromise agreement.

•Personal Injury/Clinical Negligence: There will be a maximum cap of 25% on the amount of damages taken as a success fee in personal injury cases.

•Personal Injury/Clinical Negligence: “Qualified One Way Costs Shifting” to be brought in. In PI/CN cases a claimant will not have to pay defendant’s costs should the claim fail, but conversely the defendant would have to pay the claimant’s costs if they fail. This would be subject to conditions such as the parties’ conduct and their financial means.

•Part 36 offers: The rule in Carver v BAA (Part 36 offers and the definition of “beating an offer”) shall be abolished – if an offer is beaten by any amount the court must (unless it considers it unjust to do so) penalise the offeree.

•Part 36 offers: An additional sanction of 10% of the value of successful claim shall be payable by defendants who do not accept a claimant’s reasonable offer that they then fail to beat at trial.

•A change to costs assessments so that only reasonable and proportionate costs may be recovered from a losing party.

•The prescribed litigant in person costs rate shall be increased and shall continue to increase in line with inflation.

The changes which require primary legislation (e.g. CFAs and DBAs) will be enacted when Parliamentary time permits. The other changes that rely on secondary legislation and changes to the Civil Procedure Rules (e.g. changes to costs recoverability/shifting and Part 36 offers) will follow more swiftly. These changes will be discussed in more detail in the next Litigation Bulletin to clients.

Clients should seriously consider whether they need to take court action in a dispute before these major changes to the recoverability of costs from opponents come into force. For further information please contact David Bowman on dab@royds.com or on 020 7583 2222.

For more information please follow this link:
http://www.justice.gov.uk/consultations/docs/jackson-report-government-response.pdf

My Blog from Basel by Stephen Welfare

Another trade show, another City but not the same thing. On Wednesday, 30th March I attended the Watch and Jewellery Show, BaselWorld, Switzerland. As a first time visitor I was impressed at the size of the stands compared to what I am used to seeing at Spring Fair and IJL. Two storey constructions were the norm amongst the watch companies with Rolex the pick of the bunch – marble walls and staircases no less!

It was good to see Royds’ clients Dreyfuss Group (Rotary), IBB (Hoxton London) and Rodney Rayner, amongst others, putting on impressive displays. Spread over several halls in separate buildings there was, once again, plenty of walking for your hard working IP Lawyer.

As I was only there for the day it was impossible to cover the whole Show and difficult to determine quite what was on trend this year. What I observed was plenty of bling, bright colours and perhaps surprisingly in these austere times a liberal use of diamonds, other gemstones and crystal. Not so much keep calm and carry on, but perhaps more a case of to hell with it!

Exhibitors at BaselWorld agree in the Show terms and conditions to the jurisdiction of BaselWorld panel regarding any intellectual property disputes that arise at the Show. This is very much instant “justice” with arguably a home bias. The complainant has the strong advantage of being able to prepare its case, lodge papers with the panel and invoke the arbitration clause in the contract. Administrators then descend upon the defender stand who is summarily brought before the panel and required to prove its innocence. There is no advance disclosure or witness evidence so the party having its documents has the clear advantage. It was very interesting talking to Royds’ Swiss colleague, Christoph Kunzi, Infosuisse, about his experiences of this procedure. My advice to any UK businesses exhibiting at BaselWorld is to take design sketches and any registrations with you, even if only in electronic form on a memory stick.

Best regards to all Royds’ clients who exhibited or visited BaselWorld and apologies to the many of you that I was unable to meet up with. Here is to prosperous trading through to the next major Trade Show IJL at Earls Court.

Budget

The Budget was held on 23 March 2011. I have the following key points:-

• There was an emphasis on encouraging enterprise investment in the UK by increasing the lifetime Entrepreneurs’ Relief for capital gains tax to £10,000,000 so that any gains up to the amount of £10,000,000 are charged at 10% instead of the standard rate of 18% (or the higher rate of 28% for higher rate taxpayers).

• The charge for non-domiciled people resident in the UK has been increased from £30,000 to £50,000 if that person has been in the UK for twelve years, but there will be no tax charge for omitting income or gains into the UK in order to invest in a UK business. There was a promise not to make further changes to the rules for non-domiciles during this parliament.

• Tax relief on Enterprise Investment Schemes is also increased to 30% from 20%.

• There is now 10% relief on Inheritance Tax so this will be reduced from 40% to 36% if you leave 10% of your estate to charity.

• Consultation will take place on the provisions for making gifts of pre-eminent heritage assets to the state.

• Plans will be made to close down bonus schemes, SDLT avoidance, capital gains for companies and lifelong employee interest free loans.


For further information please contact Christopher Hall on cdh@royds.com or 020 7583 2222

Offshore Trusts by Christopher Hall

The recent events across the Middle East have highlighted the importance of wealth preservation. Contrary to popular belief tax avoidance is not the prime reason for protecting your wealth in an offshore structure. Chris Hall’s experience in the Cayman Islands was dealing with a number of clients who had assets in potentially unstable countries. They often had an urgent need to protect their assets against a regime change, which could quickly result in their hard earned family wealth being nationalised.

The huge potential losses to British business interests following the recent events in Libya highlight these dangers only too clearly with a number of U.K. firms being left out of pocket. However, for the individual families on the ground the imminent danger of losing all their wealth is much more real. Protecting your assets in a suitable offshore structure in a stable regime is for individuals affected now more important than ever.

Chris Hall is able to advise on which jurisdiction is most suitable for individual families and how best to structure these assets. For example, if a family is based in the Middle East it can be very important to ensure that their wishes comply with Islamic rule. Chris Hall and his team are able to provide advice on Sharia compliant Wills and trusts.

For further information please contact Christopher Hall on cdh@royds.com or 020 7583 2222

Wine Tasting Evening 3rd March 2011

The Private Client Department along with Sandro Forte of Forte Financial invited clients and guests to enjoy a Wine Tasting Evening last week at the Royds offices. Royds Corporate Partner and Cellarmaster of the Solicitor’s Wine Society, Duncan Holden, took the guests through the wine tasting, sharing his expertise in the subject.

Wine from France, Spain and even Lebanon were tasted; some were enjoyed much more than others but we all took away some tips that will be used to impress others in the future. Our sensory evaluation and guess work were then put to the test with a quiz to match the wine with the description and price; a much harder task than first envisaged. Conversation was flowing along with the wine and I am sure new acquaintances were made by all.

The winners of the evening took home wine tasting books as prizes so they could maintain their newly found talent.

Thank you to all those that attended.

The future is bright – Employment quiz report by Fiona Aitken

The Royds employment team, their co-workers, clients and guests did a great job of quashing the winter blues this week as 80+ enthusiastic contenders battled to be quiz champions.

Someone in the organising committee was one step ahead of the game as the event was held in a basement wine bar. Blackberries were therefore as much use as a wrist watch. However, once the wine got flowing the inner genius emerged – or possibly the writer was simply imagining things?

Thankfully, there was only one law related question so the attending barristers and solicitors avoided any undue embarrassment and not too many points were lost due to dodgy spelling – clearly some of us have developed a shocking reliance on spell check.

The ‘connections’ round was a clever twist on the usual series of questions as the last answer to the question in the round related to the answers of all previous questions. Teams could either be confident of their answers above or were thrown spectacularly off track.

So, thanks go out to all those who made Tuesday the great night that it was. From a Royds perspective it was excellent to see all those in person who all too often we deal with via internet and telephone.

We hope to see you all again at the next event but until then we leave with a thought… The winning team consisted of a disproportionate number of Royds trainees. Therefore, either the closely guarded questions were revealed prematurely to some or, as we forcefully contend, the future of the firm is in very good hands!

The Information Commissioner Gets Tough

Information Commissioner gets tough with fines for Data Protection Breaches by John North and Emma Boulter

We have just prepared a short bulletin on this topic which has been sent to our corporate and not for profit clients. In November, the Information Commissioner’s Office issued its first fines for serious breaches of the Data Protection Act.

Both public sector organisations and private companies have been fined – in one case as much as £100,000 (although the maximum possible is £500,000). The breaches were for relatively ordinary (and possibly commonplace) operational and day-to-day issues such as misdirected faxes and unencrypted laptops. However, in both cases the information was highly sensitive.

The bulletin offers some practical advice on what to do to avoid breaches in your organisation and offers some guidance on testing your Data Protection compliance procedures.

Please let us know if you would like a copy of the bulletin.

Stephen Welfare reports from Spring Fair NEC

I am back at Birmingham NEC once again for the International Spring Fair. I think this is my 17th year at the event and whilst I do now know my way around the halls of the NEC, I still seem to get lost driving around the Birmingham ring road?

On Sunday I resumed my advisory role on the stand of the British Jewellers Association for whom Royds operate the intellectual property protection service, ‘COPYWATCH’. It was a lively start to the show with plenty of enquiries to field on a range of issues. Jewellery has its own designated show within Spring Fair and this year extra effort appears to have been made by the event organisers and the exhibitors to create a vibrant and really rather exciting event.

At the heart of this is the Pandorra Catwalk Café, which together with catwalk shows in the fashion accessories hall have created a touch of chic this year. Still popular with buyers are charms and bead jewellery, with Chamilia and P Kennedy / Truth giving Pandorra good competition. On Monday the BJA Award 2011 went to Dark Horse (non precious) and to Burkmar (precious metal).

As well as being on site to provide advice Royds Solicitors are also able to provide representation at the event if any infringement of intellectual property rights occur. The number of incidents of infringement across the Spring Fair has been significantly down on previous years, which prompts the question has plagiarism been beaten?

The war on design theft is far from over, but greater IP awareness through initiatives such as PIPR® and effective action by COPYWATCH have undoubtedly contributed to the reductions noted.

On the social scene the invitation only party for The Jewellery Show at the Jam House, Birmingham was the place to be. The good, bad and beautiful of UK jewellery were seen having a jolly good time. Heaven knows how exhibitors and visitors, who have been on their feet all day hiking around the vast NEC, find the energy to go dancing? My thanks to John Stewart Jewellers, Mancini and Hockley Mint Limited for all their hospitality.

Back in the giftware halls business appeared to be good with confidence returning. Royds clients, Bomb Cosmetics, Richard Lang & Son, Instant Gifts International and East of India all reported that they had enjoyed a busy 2010, despite the recession. The Spring Fair is the UK’s biggest retail trade event with 300,000 new product launches from around 3,000 exhibitors spread over 15 halls. My feet are killing me. I will be pleased to return to my desk and chair!

Stephen Welfare
9 February 2011

Banter in the work place: camaraderie or harassment? by Fiona Aitken (employment department)

Sky Sports this week ousted football commentators Andy Gray and Richard Keys after they made sexist comments about a female assistant referee. The naming and shaming of the pair has re-sparked the debate about when and how we ought to draw the line between banter in the workplace and unlawful discrimination.

In October 2010 the Equality Act was said to “signal a new era for discrimination law.” However, the question of whether it is better equipped do deal with situations such as those found in the Sky Sports studio – and let's face it many other working environments - is yet to be fully tested in the courts.

The difficulty lies in the many forms in which sexual harassment and discrimination can take. A comment or act found offensive by one may be perfectly innocuous to another. After all it usually depends on the circumstances in question and everyone has a right to decide for themselves what behavior they find acceptable or not. Legislation therefore cannot be overly prescriptive. On the other hand harassment in the workplace is not purely left to a judgment call.

Employers can be clear regarding a number of elements in the law and by putting into practice some basic policies they can make great strides towards protecting their employees and avoiding litigation.

Case law decided before the Equality Act 2010 came into force will still apply. Therefore, a single incident can be enough to constitute harassment (Reed v Steadman, 1999), and some conduct must be presumed to be unwanted unless proved otherwise. Further, the fact that the employee has tolerated conduct for years does not mean that it cannot be unwanted. (Munchkins Restaurant Ltd and another v Karmazyn and others, 2009).

Moonsar v Fiveways Express Transport Ltd (2005) demonstrates the danger of permitting a certain culture or environment in the workplace. In that case male colleagues downloaded pornographic images onto computer screens. Their actions were held to be discriminatory even though the Claimant was never shown the images and she had not made any complaint at the time. The Employment Appeals Tribunal found that this was treatment that would obviously undermine the Claimant’s dignity. It was therefore discriminatory.

From the alternative perspective the tribunal in Smith v Vodafone UK (2000) found a comment made by a male employee to a female co-worker who had a punnet of melon slices on her desk that she has “got some lovely melons there” was a corny joke. The tribunal held the remark was made innocently and did not affect the Claimant's dignity at work.

As these situations continue to occur there are those, such as Top Gear presenters Jeremy Clarkson and James May, that fear political correctness and employment legislation will have the effect of abolishing humour in the work place. While a line that continues to move is inevitably a difficult one to draw it seems Richard Keys said it all shortly after his resignation from Sky Sports: "Prehistoric banter isn't acceptable in the modern world. I accept that. We failed to change when the world has changed. It was wrong. I deserve to be battered."

Forecast changeable for retail property portfolios by Mark Newbold

Retail Week reports on whether the decision by HMV to downsize its property portfolio by 60 stores signals a more widespread move by retailers to reduce their commitments to bricks and mortar.

Although some retailers are clearly feeling the pinch and consolidating, and some of the secondary shopping centres and smaller high streets are suffering higher vacancy rates, it is not all doom and gloom.

There is optimism in the market in some quarters with some retailers and landlords remaining optimistic about continued growth for traditional retail.

Retirement age to be abolished by Richard Woodman

My employment colleagues – Gemma Ospedale and Helen Murphie – have been busy sending information out on the Government’s recent decision to abolish the Default Retirement Age of 65 from 1st October 2011.

Many of our clients have asked for help to review and revise their employment contracts and other human resources policies to ensure that they will not fall foul of the new restrictions and to navigate the transition arrangements for those reaching 65 before October.

If you would like a copy of the briefings or bulletins we have issued on this and related employment matters, please let me know rmw@royds.com

Our family and private client teams in Law Society's Probate Practitioner's Handbook

Patrick Hart, family partner and head of the Family Wealth department, is quoted in the sixth edition of the Law Society's Probate Practitioner's Handbook.

The topics on which he is quoted are:

* The integration of our private client, family and residential conveyancing teams
* The firm's expertise with particular groups of clients such as large family estates, international finance and business people, sports people, celebrities, media personalities, entrepreneurs, those with special religious needs and the LGBT community.
* Our private client and commercial lawyers presenting seminars in the Middle East in conjunction with a global bank.
* Offshore experience in Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands and the Bahamas