Wed08232017

Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP

In part one of a two-part consideration, Tom Snelling and Lauma Skruzmane survey the perilous path of Brexit

Now that the Brexit negotiations have finally begun and the principal negotiators have exchanged mountaineering-themed gifts, the steepness of the climb ahead is dauntingly apparent. The best path to tread will not always be clear. In fact, for both sides, the negotiations will be labyrinthine. As the initial discussions have already demonstrated, media and public scrutiny of the negotiators’ progress is unrelenting (with some quick to look for evidence of concession and the whiff of a U-turn). Securing agreement on even (comparatively) straightforward issues will be challenging, but more so when complex legal points are engaged. Against this backdrop, a successful resolution to questions about the future framework for jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments will be far from easy; however, securing such a resolution is vital to safeguard individuals’ rights and the success of any UK-EU trading relations post-Brexit.

Andrew Craig summarises a recent case on misrepresentation

Contractual negotiations are always to be conducted and recorded with the utmost care, not least in the light of Cramaso LLP v Ogilvie-Grant, Earl of Seafield [2014], which establishes that it is possible to owe a duty of care to someone in negligent misrepresentation even if the statement was originally made to someone else.

Caroline Stroud and Lara Zellick show why organisations need to encourage employees to disclose malpractice as part of their anti-corruption procedures

Whistleblowing is once again moving up the corporate agenda in the UK as a result of the Bribery Act 2010. To defend themselves against the new corporate offence of bribery, organisations must have adequate anti-corruption procedures in place, which a robust system for employees to disclose wrongdoing without fear of reprisal will help to demonstrate.

Caroline Stroud and Charlotte Stafford investigate how the ending of the right to retire employees automatically at 65 will affect employers

On 13 January 2011 the government confirmed its proposals to phase out, and eventually abolish, the UK default retirement age (DRA) meaning that the right to retire employees automatically at 65 will cease to exist. The change will be made by way of the Employment Equality (Repeal of Retirement Age Provisions) Regulations 2011 (the Regulations), a draft of which was published on 17 February 2011. The Regulations will come into force on 6 April 2011.