Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Irwin Mitchell serious injury claim services

While no type of personal injury is trivial to the person who has suffered it, as the name suggests, serious injury claims relate to the worst types of injuries people can endure, such as those affecting areas like the spinal column or the head. This type of claim can cover a number of serious injuries, including those relating to amputations, fractured and broken bones, brain and other head injuries and injuries to the spinal column. Whichever of these injuries a person suffers, it can cause tremendous damage to their quality of life, affecting their ability to work and earn money, as well as their personal relationships. Furthermore, anyone in this position looking to pursue a rightful claim for compensation will need considerable help and support from specially trained legal professionals, in order to successfully accomplish this – the kind of support offered by a company such as Irwin Mitchell.

For example, when it comes to claims involving amputations, the client may well not only be left unable to work, or at least to work in the field they were in prior to the accident. In addition to this, they will also require rehabilitation and training in order to be able to adapt to their physical handicap, as well as requiring modifications to be made to their home in order to accommodate this. A company with specialist experience in personal injury claims of this kind, such as Irwin Mitchell, will help to secure the appropriate financial compensation to help the client adjust and will also look to secure short-term payments to cover the immediate costs of treatment and care that the client needs while the claim is being pursued. The company’s team of lawyers dealing with these cases are members of the Limbloss Legal Panel – giving them both the legal experience and also the sensitivity to be able to help clients who are attempting to secure recompense while still recovering emotionally from the impact of their injury.

If you want to know more about Irwin Mitchell’s offers in the area of serious injury claims, then visit the Irwin Mitchell newcastle page on www.irwinmitchell.com.

Tags:
Posted December 21st, 2011 in Uncategorized |

No Comments

The cheque’s still in the post !

Many will be aware of the proposal to scrap cheques. As many businesses will attest, there is little more frustrating than the old excuse of “the cheque is in the post” and frankly, we believe that cheques are outdated and inefficient. however, they are used still, predominantly it seems by the over 65’s, and so for whatever reason, whether Equality Act, human rights or due to lobbying, the Payments Council have decided not to scrap cheques. A retrograde step we think, but what do you think ?

Posted July 13th, 2011 in Uncategorized |

No Comments

UK Public debt £2 trillion

Whatever you view on the controversial cuts to legal aid funding, whether on moral, legal or economic grounds, the figures for legal aid expenditure are dwarfed by the fact that economists are now suggesting the UK, in reality owes £2 trillion for public dents, the majority being the cost of public pensions. When figures reach the trillions, we find it hard to actually conceptualise this, what about you ?

Posted July 13th, 2011 in Uncategorized |

No Comments

Latest mortgage lending figures

Mortgage lending rises  in May (depending on which way you look at it)

It is difficult at the moment to get a clear picture of what’s happening in the residential housing market although most believe that it is still suffering inertia at best. On the one hand, mortgage rates are still very low, on the other, lenders are still not actively lending. Then there are the still highly uncertain economic conditions.

Figures from the Council of mortgage lenders do suggest that lending rose by 12% in May, but this couold simply be because April was a slow month, seasonal factors and an increase in remortgaging. We wouldn’t read too much into any figures at the moment. Just our view.

Posted June 26th, 2011 in Uncategorized |

No Comments

Spying on employees

Spying on staff

Competitor analysis, perhaps a nice term for some forms of competitor spying is far from uncommon, but monitoring of staff is not regularly reported although undoubtedly also occurs.

In an unusual case reported on this week, a highly successful entrepreneur, Elena Ambrosiadou, hedge fund owner of a £1.65 billion fund, Ikos asset management is alleged to have engaged extensive covert surveillance on staff.

The employee claiming that surveillance took place and alleged breach of contract in the High Court has obtained judgment in default of defence against Ms Ambrosiadou. As she has not filed a  defence, the allegation remains strictly speaking untested but in legal terms, it is likely that spying on a member of staff to the extent alleged would be likely to be  a breach of the employment relationship and possibly a fundamental breach of contract giving the employee the right to resign and claim unfair constructive dismissal.

Posted May 22nd, 2011 in Uncategorized |

No Comments

Tax Treaty Update

Beach2Following a period in which tax information sharing agreements have been being signed at an unprecedented rate, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) have issued updated guidance on double taxation treaties.
Over recent years HMRC have negotiated tax treaties and information-sharing agreements with many former ‘tax havens’.
If you have a financial connection with a foreign country and want to know what the implications might be, click here for the regulations and call us for advice!

Tags: , , ,
Posted April 18th, 2011 in Uncategorized |

Comments Off

Religion or Belief Discrimination – What Constitutes a Philosophical Belief?

When the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 were first introduced, employees were protected from discrimination by reason of any ‘religion, religious belief or similar philosophical belief’. The wording was changed in 2007, with the word ‘similar’ being removed so that the Regulations covered ‘any religion, religious or philosophical belief’. This wording has been retained in the Equality Act 2010, which replaced the 2003 Regulations in October 2010.
In Granger plc v Nicholson, the Employment Appeal Tribunal identified the criteria which must be satisfied for a belief to be a philosophical belief under the 2003 Regulations. Relying on this test, the Employment Tribunal has held (Maistry v BBC) that the belief of a BBC employee that ‘public service broadcasting has the higher purpose of promoting cultural interchange and social cohesion’ falls within the definition of a philosophical belief.
Mr Maistry claimed that he had been unfairly dismissed and discriminated against on the grounds of age and/or philosophical belief. A Pre-Hearing Review was held to determine whether or not his belief constituted a philosophical belief such as to entitle him to protection under the 2003 Regulations. Mr Maistry argued that the BBC is a public funded body with a clear statement of purpose. He relied on statements made by Lord Reith, the first director general of the BBC, and by Mark Thompson, the present director general, regarding the purpose of public broadcasting, which is to ‘foster a reasoning citizenry’, to ‘support the development of an inclusive, participatory and enlightened democracy’ and to provide a ‘public space’, in which people can encounter culture, education and debate and share experiences, that is neither part of the Government nor the State nor purely governed by commercial considerations. He gave evidence of comment on this purpose by philosophers and academics.
As regards the strength of his belief, Mr Maistry had been a student leader, trade unionist and journalist in South Africa during the struggle against apartheid. He was banned from studying at university in South Africa after he took part in the black student boycotts of 1972. He was forced to flee South Africa for a second time in 1987 after his news reports to international agencies led to security police raids on the Press Trust of South Africa News Agency.
The BBC accepted that Mr Maistry’s belief was worthy of respect in a democratic society, but maintained that it was in reality an opinion, not a philosophical belief for the purposes of the 2003 Regulations.
The ET applied the 5-step test set out in Grainger v Nicholson and found that:
  1. There was no reason to doubt that Mr Maistry had a genuine and strongly held belief;
  2. Mr Maistry’s views constituted a belief, rather than an opinion based on the present state of information available. Whilst a belief does not have to be shared, there was evidence that his belief was embraced by academics and philosophers;
  3. The belief clearly related to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour and there was nothing in the 2003 Regulations nor in Grainger v Nicholson to prevent the public aims of an organisation amounting to a philosophical belief if those aims were the result of an underlying philosophical belief;
  4. The belief had attained a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance. The ET did not accept the BBC’s contention that it was a political opinion or based on a political philosophy and, in any case, Burton J in Grainger v Nicholson could see no reason why a political philosophical belief could not qualify; and
  5. The BBC had accepted that the belief was worthy of respect in a democratic society. Nor was it incompatible with human dignity and it did not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.
The ET refuted any suggestion that its decision would ‘open the floodgates’ so that Tribunals would find themselves inundated by claims from employees on the ground that they have been discriminated against for having a strongly held belief in the mission statement of their public or private sector employer. Any belief must fall to be tested on the individual facts in each case. Furthermore, even when it has been established that an individual’s belief does constitute a philosophical belief, the claimant still has to prove that he or she has suffered less favourable treatment and, if so, that this was on account of that belief.
Contact us for advice on any aspect of discrimination law.

Tags: , , ,
Posted April 15th, 2011 in Uncategorized |

Comments Off

Email – Who Owns the Copyright?

Copyright is a right which exists without any specific steps having to be taken. It applies whenever there is a work created which contains original skill or labour. It applies to written material and that includes email, as a recent High Court ruling has confirmed. The case involved a roofing slate company, which sent an email to another company during the course of a dispute about the quality of roofing slates. When the second company forwarded the email on to the roofing contractor who was the defendant in the action, the slate company alleged that the letter involved a substantial degree of independent skill and labour on the part of its author and was therefore entitled to copyright protection. The Court agreed. The moral of the story is to think before forwarding something by email – you might just be breaching the author’s copyright if you do.
The Digital Economy Act 2010 has updated the law with regard to dealing with copyright infringement online.

Tags: , , ,
Posted April 2nd, 2011 in Uncategorized |

Comments Off

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

Posted February 8th, 2010 in Uncategorized |

Comment (1)