Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are legal contracts or provisions of legal contracts that place confidentiality requirements on another in respect of certain information, usually for something of value or payment. They are sometimes referred to as ‘gagging clauses’. In an employment context, they are often used to maintain the confidentiality of settlement terms (or the events leading up to such terms being agreed). The use of NDAs has come under increasing scrutiny in recent years, with the #MeToo movement and high-profile examples (such as Mohamed Al Fayed and Harrods) of them being used to cover-up misconduct. With their use being restricted in new areas with effect from 1st October 2025, we summarise the current legal position regarding NDAs, and where it is headed.
Acts of harassment are generally committed by individuals, not corporate entities. How is it, then, that businesses can be liable for the harassing acts of their employees? The answer lies in the concept of ‘vicarious liability’. Through the concept of vicarious liability, businesses are held liable for any acts of harassment by employees committed ‘in the course of employment’.
In the recent employment tribunal case of Kalina v Digitas LBI Ltd, two applicants were interviewed for a role. Both were found, following a competency-based assessment, to be appointable. The successful candidate was chosen, in large part, because she was considered to be the ‘best fit’ for the team. The interviewer noted that she had ‘vibed’ with her at interview. The unsuccessful candidate alleged that this way of choosing which person to appoint was discriminatory on grounds of race and disability. Allegations included:
A probationary period is a trial phase at the start of a new employment relationship, during which both the employer and the employee assess the suitability of the role. They are usually three to six months in duration. They are a useful tool for employers if used effectively. Here are our top tips:
Redundancy is one of the five ‘potentially fair reasons’ for dismissal recognised in UK law. However, to convert a ‘potentially fair’ redundancy into a ‘fair’ one, employers must be able to show that the situation was a genuine redundancy and that a fair process of selection and consultation was followed. One of the key requirements for fairness is that the possibility of alternative employment has been considered. There are two different concepts which are relevant to redundancy, and both must be taken into account by employers:
It is important that employers have a clear understanding of their obligations towards whistleblowers in the workplace. It is equally important to understand that their status as whistleblowers does not make them untouchable. The law is clear: Employers will be liable for automatic unfair dismissal if they dismiss an employee because they have made protected disclosures. They could also face claims if they subject a whistleblower to a detriment on the ground that they have made a protected disclosure.
The rise of remote work post-COVID-19 is arguably the most radical shift in working patterns since the advent of email. Many employees now value flexibility as much as pay. But this flexibility comes with a trade-off – reduced visibility.
The words “redundancy” and “restructuring” carry very different connotations. Redundancy often implies cutbacks and job loss. Restructuring, on the other hand, sounds strategic and forward-looking.
It is the nature of competitive team sport that supporters of each side don’t generally like to ‘mix’ during the big games. Indeed, football, stadiums have ‘home’ and ‘away’ stands to keep the two sets of fans apart. Arguably, no game is more emotive in this regard than a local derby.
We currently have a vacancy for a senior commercial and property litigation solicitor, at Partner/Senior Associate level based in our Liverpool office.
A client following is an advantage but not a requirement. More important attributes are a network of business/professional contacts in the Merseyside area in particular, and the personality and ambition to develop their brand and the Bermans brand further and to play a role in the continued growth of the practice.
For a non-partner there would be excellent opportunities for promotion to partnership.
The successful applicant is likely to have 8 or more years’ PQE and will have experience of both general commercial litigation and commercial property litigation. They will run their own caseload and will act for SMEs in a wide range of sectors, institutional clients in the financial sector and commercial property owners and funders.
The commercial litigation work will typically include shareholder and partnership disputes; warranty claims and other claims arising from business sales; professional negligence actions; contested insurance claims; and a variety of contract disputes.
Property litigation work will typically include contested lease renewals, dilapidations claims and a wide range of other disputes involving the sale, purchase and leasing of property.
There will be some managerial responsibilities with 1-2 other members of the team being based in the Liverpool office at any given time.
Home/remote working is permitted for up to 2 days a week. Salaries are competitive and there is a firm-wide bonus scheme in place for all our fee earners. Our package includes a number of other contractual benefits.
Benefits:
25 days holiday (plus bank holidays)
A referral bonus
Bonus Scheme
Health cash plan – Paycare (eligible after successful completion of probation)
Pension plan (with the option of salary sacrifice)
| 
