In recent years the Government has applied a great deal of focus to the whole question of the funding of the civil litigation system and the ability of litigating parties to recover costs against opponents.
Continue ReadingThere was a time some years ago when a major selling point of disclosed invoice finance was the perceived ability of established Invoice Financiers practised in the art of collecting debts when compared to the frequent troubles of small businesses in persuading their customers to pay on time.
Continue ReadingUNIDROIT is a respected international organisation dedicated to the improvement of commercial law across its 65 member nations and beyond, and will be recognised by more established members of the invoice finance community (ie. older readers!) for its Convention on International Factoring which was adopted in 1988.
Continue ReadingA recent decision in the Commercial Court provided some comfort to invoice financiers facing technical arguments in litigation as to the accuracy of invoices submitted to debtors
Continue Reading
Fintech business Lanistar’s latest bold initiative to boost recruitment has landed them in hot water. Effective recruitment strategies are not just about a business picking the best applicants, they are about attracting the best applicants in the first place. In this way, recruitment comparison websites like Glassdoor, which include company reviews from existing and former employees as part of their job search functions, can have a significant impact on the quality of applicants coming through the door.
The House of Lords have amended the Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Bill to remove the proposed third-party harassment provisions. Following a debate in July 2023, the Bill has been republished with the original clause 1 (which dealt with third party harassment) removed in its entirety. Objections in the Lords included the cost to businesses, curtailment of free speech and worries about excessive state intervention in business.
In the recent case of Fernandes v DWP the Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed an appeal in a disability discrimination claim of failure to make reasonable adjustments. The key question was how you should ascertain when a ‘failure’ to make a reasonable adjustment occurs. It is important for this to be established because time begins to run for instituting a claim (by commencing ACAS Early Conciliation) from the point that the failure occurs.
Where one business purchases the business and assets of another business (or part of it) then this is likely to amount to a ‘business transfer’ under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE). A business transfer under TUPE automatically transfers the contracts of employment of all assigned employees to the new employer. The transfer will be on a single date rather than over a period of time. In some cases, the date on which the transfer occurs will be obvious but in others where there are a number of transactions over an extended period of time it may be more challenging to identify the date.
In the recent case of Stevenson and others v Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust the respondent had undertaken a restructure which had resulted in three Head of HR role being made redundant. The three employees occupying the redundant roles were offered alternative employment as HR Leads. When they refused these roles, the respondent refused to pay them a redundancy payment. The respondent alleged that they had unreasonably refused their offer of suitable alternative employment so had forfeited their right to a statutory redundancy payment under section 141 Employment Rights Act 1996.
In the recent case of Mullen v Greater Glasgow Health Board the claimant was dismissed from his role as supervisor for gross misconduct after an investigation found that he had threatened a fellow employee. The tribunal held that the respondent had carried out a full investigation and held a reasonable belief that the claimant had committed an act of misconduct but they nevertheless found that the dismissal was unfair. This was on the basis that the tribunal had its own ideas as to what the real reason for dismissal was.
| 
