66
In-house lawyers’ forum March 2017, Nottingham

In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

In-house lawyers’ forumMarch 2017, Nottingham

Page 2: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Employment update

Paul Sands, Solicitor

Page 3: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Today’s session

1. Restrictive covenants2. Immigration Act 20163. Gender Pay Reporting4. Budget

Page 4: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Restrictive Covenants

Page 5: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Restrictive covenants: Overview

• Contractual term that can place post terminationrestrictions on an employee in relation to:– Employment with competitors– Poaching colleagues– Poaching clients/customers

• To be enforceable they must be reasonable induration and geography, not going beyond what isreasonably necessary in order to protect legitimateinterests of the employer’s business

Page 6: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Bartholomews Agri Food v Thornton

• Employee began work with the employer as a traineeagronomist in 1997

• At this time he had no experience or customer base• At the time of termination, the employee’s customer

base made up for 2% of the employer’s overall turnover• Employee challenged the enforceability of a non-

compete clause which prevented him from workingwith the whole of the employer’s customer base for 6months

Page 7: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Bartholomews Agri Food v Thornton

• High Court rejected the covenant on two grounds:• If a covenant is unenforceable when it is first imposed

(it was imposed when the employee was a trainee,meaning, at that time, it was wholly unreasonable dueto his lack of client base), it will remainunenforceable regardless of experience gained orpromotions

• Preventing an employee from dealing with anycustomer regardless of previous dealings is too wide,even after a 20 year career

Page 8: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

So what?

• Don’t just get off the shelf covenants drafted up –think about it!

• When was the covenant agreed? The question iswhether it was reasonable then, not whether it isreasonable now

• Is the covenant limited?• Many covenants in employment contracts are

outdated and too wide – check them every timeyour employees are promoted – do they still work?

Page 9: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Immigration Act 2016 (IA 2016)

Page 10: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

a) Immigration: Overview

• It is unlawful to employ a person who does nothave a right to live and work in the UK or who isworking in breach of their conditions of staying inthe UK

• Initial and, sometimes, follow up checks required• Failure to do so can lead to civil or criminal

penalties• Enforced by the Home Office (via immigration

officers)

Page 11: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

b) Public Sector Fluency Duty

• Introduced under the Immigration Act 2016• Came into force on 21 November 2016• Applies to public authorities (including NHS Trusts)• Code of practice came into force on 22 December

2016 – gives guidance and examples for employers

Page 12: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

b) What is it?

• The fluency duty applies to those persons workingin roles which have, as a regular and intrinsic partof that role, a requirement to speak to members ofthe public in English.

• This could be in face to face discussions or over thetelephone.

• It covers employees, apprentices, workers andagency workers

Page 13: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

b) Steps to take

• Assess what standards are required for particularroles and whether those standards are being met.

• If not, consider training / methods of support• Review existing policies and procedures to include

reference to the fluency duty• Review employment contract to include reference

to required fluency standard• Ensure members of the public are aware of the

complaints procedure and how they can access it

Page 14: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

c) IA 2016: Other changes (1)• It used to be a criminal offence to knowingly employ

an individual who does not have the appropriatepermission to undertake the work for which they areemployed

• From 12 July 2016, the offence was widened to includeemploying an illegal worker where the employer has“reasonable cause to believe” the employee does nothave the appropriate immigration status.

• Increased conviction on indictment from 2 to 5 years

Page 15: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

c) IA 2016: Other changes (2)

• A power of immigration officers to close businesses thatcontinue to employ illegal workers

• Increased powers for immigration officers to enterbusinesses and seize/retain evidence

• A requirement that public authorities ensure public sectorworkers in customer-facing roles speak fluent English

• April 2017 - Provisions giving the secretary of state thepower to introduce an ‘immigration skills charge’ on certainemployers who sponsor skilled workers from outside the EEA

Page 16: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Gender Pay Gap Reporting

Page 17: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Gender Pay Reporting• Final draft Government regulations published 6

December 2016• All relevant employers with more than 250

employees will be required to publishinformation about their gender pay gap

• Includes bonus information• Government has pledged to work with

businesses to eliminate all-male boards in top350 companies

Page 18: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Gender Pay Reporting – nextsteps• carry out a pay audit to identify what your likely

gender pay gap will be and the reasons for this;• benchmark your gender pay gap within your industry;• consider what information you will want to add to any

report to set your figures in context;• start to plan a strategy to address your gender pay gap• Consider communication strategy ahead of publication

date• We can help you!

Page 19: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Budget

Implications for employers and employees:

- Changes to taxation of termination payments- IR35 – responsibility shifts from personal service

company to public sector ‘employer’- Removal of salary sacrifice tax breaks apart from

certain exemptions

Page 20: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Regulatory update

Rachel Lyne, Partner

Page 21: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

CPD update

Claire Stripp

Page 22: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham
Page 23: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Coffee break

Page 24: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Commercial update

Richard Nicholas, Partner

Page 25: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Areas to look at today:• Making a start

• Making a change• Making a claim

5 minutes before signature

Page 26: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Quick advert…In house lawyer “checker” Product

- Free second opinion/expert view/check a point– Approx 20 minutes on the telephone- Equivalent to seeing a specialist at their desk- Exclusively for in-house lawyers

Terms and conditions apply ☺

Page 27: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Making a start

Letters of intent

• Spartafield v Penten – CFI 2016

• Arcadis v Amec – CFI 2016

Page 28: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

So What?

LOI can be a good thing

BUT– what should happen if the agreement isn’t signed?

Page 29: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Making a change

No-Variations provisions

- Globe Motors v TRW (CA) 2016

- MWB v Rock Advertising (CA) 2016

Page 30: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

So what?

“No Variation” is a bluff

- So are long “Change Control” schedules

- Regardless of what the contract says – watch outfor changes. You need a way to respond to them!

“Your in-house lawyer – not there for pre-signature”

Page 31: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Making a Claim

Notices provisions/ preventing claims

• Oliver Nobahar Cookson v The Hut Group 2016 (CA)• Axa Reinsurance v Field 2016 (CA)• Lehman v Exxon Mobile 2016 (CFI)• Teoco v Aircon Jersey 2016 (CFI)

Page 32: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Making a Claim

Notices provisions/ preventing claims

Oliver Nobahar Cookson v The Hut Group 2016 (CA)

“…within 20 business days after becoming aware ofthe matter…”

Page 33: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Making a Claim

Notices provisions/ preventing claims

Axa Reinsurance v Field 2016 (CA)

“…as soon as possible”

Page 34: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Making a Claim

Notices provisions/ preventing claims

Lehman v Exxon Mobile 2016 (CFI)

“…by close of play”

Page 35: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Making a Claim

Notices provisions/ preventing claims

Teoco v Aircon Jersey 2016 (CFI)

“within a reasonable notice period”

“…are contemplating claiming…”

Page 36: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

So what?

• Time obligations do work BUT are interpretednarrowly (as a limit of liability)

• Likely not to capture claims/events that are new

• If you make a claim – be bold! Don’t “contemplate”claiming – just do it!

Page 37: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

In the last 5 mins

• Which 5 words that can save you from large losses?

– Let me think about it…?

– Actually…let’s not get married…?

– I’ll check with Browne Jacobson…?

Page 38: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

In the last 5 mins

Fairhurst Developments & Fairhurst v Collins(2016) CFI

– “For and on behalf of”

Page 39: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

So what?

• Making a Start– Letters of intent – can be useful, but what if nothing follows?

• Making a Change– need to be vigilant “no-variations” clauses don’t work

• Making a claim– Time limits are read narrowly. Claims must be bold.

Page 40: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

So what?

• For letter agreements in particular“For and on behalf of”

• When you need quick advice…Run it past Browne Jacobson

Page 41: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Data protection update

Helena Wootton, Partner

Page 42: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Today’s topics

• ICO priorities• Legal updates• GDPR• Brexit and adequacy

Page 43: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

The ICO and her enforcers

Page 44: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

ICO’s key priorities• Current information rights priority areas

– Health– Criminal justice– Local government– Online and mobile services

• Sectors under the spotlight– Charities– Affiliate marketing– Gambling, finance and dating– Politics

Page 45: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Security breach trends

Page 46: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Marketing concerns

Page 47: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Some recent developments• Subject access

– Ittihadieh v 5-11 Cheyne Gardens [2017] EWCA Civ121

– Dawson-Damer v Taylor Wessing LLP [2017] EWCACiv 74)

• Telephone marketing– Media Tactics March 2017– FEP Heatcare v ICO EA/2016/0093

• Text marketing– LAD Media Limited January 2017

Page 48: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Some recent developments• Telephone preference service

– IT Protect Limited Jan 2017

• Government to introduce monetary penaltiesfor directors

• Disqualification of Leighton John Power– Help Direct UK MPN

Page 49: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

New guidance

• Consent – consultation open• Big Data, artificial intelligence, machine learning

and data protection• Data portability• Lead supervisory authorities• Data Protection Officers

Page 50: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Other legislation

• ePrivacy Regulation• Digital Economy Bill

Page 51: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

GDPR – May 2018

• Consider your organisations readiness for GDPR?• Who is preparing your organisation for GDPR?• What is the most significant hurdle your

organisation faces in preparing for GDPR?

Page 52: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

New guidance from ICO

• Consent – consultation open• Big Data, artificial intelligence, machine learning

and data protection• Data Portability• Lead supervisory authorities• Data Protection Officers

Page 53: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

UK data protection post-Brexit?

• Adequacy and essential equivalence• Possible stumbling blocks• Impact of inadequacy

Page 54: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Competition law update

Matt Woodford, Partner

Page 55: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

What will we cover?

• General update• What’s on the horizon?

• Brexit• Will anything really change?

• Online restrictions• Where to tread carefully

Page 56: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Update - Fines

• EU– €3.7 billion in 2016– Average is €1.8 billion p.a

• UK– £142 million in 2016– £0.37 million in 2014!– Pharmaceutical, modelling

agencies, online posters,bathroom fittings, cateringequipment, galvanisedsteel tanks

Page 57: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Update – UK focus• More cases (16 in 2016 v. 6.8

in previous 5 years)• Commitment to more cases –

increase target by 50%• Balanced portfolio of big &

small cases– Warning & advisory letters– Director disqualification

(online posters case)

• Any areas of focus?– Pharmaceutical– Value for money for public

services– Online & digital

Page 58: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Brexit – What will change?

• Little change in short tomedium term– Competition Act modelled on

EU competition law– Duty of cooperation will fall

away – look to the US (?)– Still subject to EU law in EU!

• But - no longer in singlemarket (?)– Fortress UK (?)– Absolute import/export

restrictions (?)

Page 59: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Brexit – Who will you deal with?• Parallel competition

law investigations• Merger control

– No more one-stopshop

– More notifications tomultiple regulators

– CMA anticipating 40% -50% increase inworkload

Page 60: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Online restrictions – Beware!

• Remains a key priorityfor CMA and rest of EU

• More cases, more focusbut still limitedguidance!

Page 61: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Online restrictions – Beware!• UK cases – bathroom fittings;

catering equipment; posters &frames

• Warning letters – 37% relatedto online

• Advisory letters – 43% relatedto online

• Sectors – cosmetics &toiletries; clothing; recreation& sports goods; electronicsaccessories; leisure products;electronic equipment; utilities– price comparison sites

Page 62: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Online restrictions – Caution areas• EU guidance

– Internet friendly– Limited help– Undermining of exclusive

and selective systems (?)• Absolute online sales ban

– Not even in a selectivesystem (Pierre Fabre)

– Consider bricks & mortarrequirement in selectivesystem

– Consider quality standards forsite

Page 63: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Online restrictions – Cautionareas• Price (examples from CMA

letters)– Below minimum advertised

price– Fixed advertised price– Withdrawal of discount– Withdrawal of supply

• Price comparison site bans– BMW / carwow case

(January’17)– German case – sports

goods

Page 64: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Online restrictions – Cautionareas• Third party platforms

– EU guidance suggeststhat a restriction is ok

– German cases havetaken a different line

– Case before ECJ onuse in a selectivesystem (Coty)

Page 65: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

Your speakers today

Richard Nicholas|0121 237 3992 |[email protected]

Paul Sands|0115 976 6076|[email protected]

Rachel Lyne|0121 237 4584|[email protected]

Claire Stripp| 0330 045 2134|[email protected]

Helena Wootton|0115 976 6108|[email protected]

Matthew Woodford|0121 237 3965|[email protected]

Page 66: In-house lawyers' forum, March 2017, Nottingham

All information correct at time of production.

The information and opinions expressed within thisdocument are no substitute for full legal advice. It isfor guidance only and illustrates the law as at thepublished date. If in doubt, please telephone us on0370 270 6000.

© Browne Jacobson LLP 2017 – The informationcontained within this document is and shall remain theproperty of Browne Jacobson. This document may notbe reproduced without the prior consent of BrowneJacobson.