In our Summer 2019 newsletter, we looked at the changes to IR35 that are due to be implemented in 2020 (IR35 changes). IR35 rules focus on those individuals who operate as independent self employed contractors but actually work like employees and the rules aim to ensure such individuals pay tax and NI in line with employees. Originally the onus was on the individual to decide if they were caught within the scope of IR35.
In 2017 the government, to combat what it believed to be widespread abuse of the rules, introduced changes in the public sector which put the onus on the organisations who contracted with the individuals to decide whether the individual was caught within the scope of IR35. These changes are set to be rolled out to the private sector in April 2020.
What would you do if you suspected one of your employees was struggling with alcohol or drug dependence? Does their dependence amount to a disability? Are you justified in dismissing somebody who comes to work smelling of alcohol?
The recent news that foreign exchange company Travelex is being held to ransom by hackers after a cyber attack is a reminder to organisations that cyber security is a business-critical issue. The gang claiming to be behind the hack has demanded £4.6m and explained that they hacked into the Travelex databases six months before the ransom demand was issued on 31 December 2019, spending that period downloading client data including names, dates of birth, credit card details and national insurance numbers.
The attack has led to Travelex taking down its website in 30 countries and turning off its computer systems. Could your business recover from such an attack asks our Commercial team?
We frequently advise business owners on disputes that arise due to poorly drafted contracts, outdated documentation or business relationships in which the terms have never been documented in writing – leading to confusion between the parties as to what the actual terms are. These disputes can prove costly and time consuming for businesses of any size.
Once these disputes have arisen, business owners will often ‘kick themselves’ for not reviewing their contracts for years or letting relationships form without any formal written documentation but, as with many things in life, hindsight is a wonderful thing.
James Whittaker is a Partner in the insolvency team, having joined Bermans in 2019 after practicing law at large international law firms since qualifying as a solicitor in 2012.
Prior to qualification, James studied Psychology at the University of Liverpool and then converting to law at the University of Law at Chrisleton.
James has experience acting for and advising companies, individuals, directors, creditors and office-holders within insolvency proceedings in respect of both contentious and non-contentious assignments.
Currently, James has a focus on contentious insolvency proceedings and is regularly instructed to issue and defend applications under the Insolvency Act 1986 and the Insolvency Rules 2016 including:
Applications for injunctions to restrain presentation of or advertisement of winding up petitions,
All stages of the creditors’ winding up petition process, including opposing a petition which is disputed in good faith on substantial grounds;
All stages of the bankruptcy petition process, including applications to set aside statutory demands and disputed bankruptcy petition hearings;
Full range of office-holder applications arising from the administration of insolvent estates against directors, companies and individuals (including misfeasance/preference/undervalue/void dispositions),
Acting for Trustees in Bankruptcy against individuals and companies, applications for possession and sale and annulment applications;
Administration applications include applications to challenge validity of appointment, and administration extension applications;
Applications for block transfers of office holder appointments.
Outside of work, James likes to spend as much time as possible outside either cycling (having recently completed Haute Route Alps) or walking/camping in the hills of North Wales and the Lake District. James is also an avid follower of professional cycling, and Liverpool Football Club.
James has been named as ranked as a ‘Next Generation Partner’ by the Legal 500 2025 (having been a ‘Rising Star in 2024) and has been described by his clients as “a superb litigator who is responsive knowledgeable and a pleasure to deal with’ .
Following the Grenfell tragedy and the recent student accommodation fire in Bolton, the pressure is on for Universities to ensure that their whole estate is “fully fire safe”.
This doesn’t just require an extensive review of University owned and managed premises, but also a review of accommodation, teaching space and research facilities owned or operated by private providers and partners.
North west commercial law firm Bermans has recently strengthened their employment law offering with a new expanded team, welcoming four new solicitors to the department throughout 2019 so far.
The firm, which has offices in Liverpool and Manchester, put plans in place to expand their employment team to cope with increasing work loads during the previous financial year.
In a redundancy situation, an employee might be entitled to both statutory and contractual redundancy payments. Statutory redundancy payments are calculated using age, length of service and weekly pay (currently capped at £525). Contractual payments can be more generous. What happens when a contractual sum isn’t paid, and the employee brings a breach of contract claim to recover it? Does the statutory redundancy element form part of the £25,000 cap for a breach of contract claim in the employment tribunal?
Under section 45A of the Employment Rights Act 1996, workers have the right not to be treated badly by their employer for refusing to work in breach of the Working Time Regulations 1998 (WTR). If such a refusal is the reason (or main reason) for an employee’s dismissal, their dismissal will be automatically unfair. The case of Paxur v Lexington Catering Services examines how explicit that refusal needs to be.
Most employment claims should be brought within a three-month time limit. If it is not ‘reasonably practicable’ for an employee to present his claim within the three-month time limit, an employment tribunal has the discretion to extend the time limit. There are two questions the tribunal must ask: was it reasonably practicable to lodge the claim within the time limit? If not, was it then lodged within a reasonable period? The ACAS early conciliation process provides a potential one-month extension of time following the conclusion of early conciliation. However, this only applies if ACAS were contacted within the initial three-month time limit. The EAT has looked at this issue in Pearce v Bank of America Merrill Lynch.
| 
In a redundancy situation, an employee might be entitled to both statutory and contractual redundancy payments. Statutory redundancy payments are calculated using age, length of service and weekly pay (currently capped at £525). Contractual payments can be more generous. What happens when a contractual sum isn’t paid, and the employee brings a breach of contract claim to recover it? Does the statutory redundancy element form part of the £25,000 cap for a breach of contract claim in the employment tribunal?