Tag: United Kingdom

  • Solicitor apprenticeships: Which firms offer them, what they pay and how many are up for grabs

    Exclusive research


    Legal Cheek’s inaugural guide to life as a solicitor apprentice at the UK’s leading law firms is now live.

    The Solicitor Apprenticeships Most List 2024 features over 30 law firms, from Magic Circle giants and UK-based global elite players, to the leading national and specialist firms. You can search for which firms offer the most apprenticeships and how much they pay.

    The launch of new list coincides with start of National Apprenticeship Week, which runs from 5-9 February and aims to shine a light on the positive impact that apprenticeships make to individuals, businesses and the wider economy.

    NEW: The 2024 Legal Cheek Solicitor Apprenticeships Most List

    The Solicitor Apprenticeships Most List serves as an interactive guide for aspiring apprentices, allowing them to assess their preferred law firms based on apprenticeship numbers, pay, office locations, and more. Each firm profile, featuring a distinctive Legal Cheek View, provides a comprehensive analysis contributed by apprentices within the organisation. This offers sixth formers valuable insights into the actual apprentice experience at each firm.

    The Apprenticeships List complements our popular Firms Most List, which offers deeper insights into life at the firms and is geared towards university graduates pursuing qualification through the more traditional training contract route.

    Each profile on the Apprenticeships Most List also provides crucial information about the structure of each apprenticeship, the approach to studying the LLB and SQE, office culture and social scene. It also highlights key deadlines for applications, insight days, and other apprenticeship-focused recruitment events.

    NEW: The 2024 Legal Cheek Solicitor Apprenticeships Most List

    The post Solicitor apprenticeships: Which firms offer them, what they pay and how many are up for grabs appeared first on Legal Cheek.

    Source

  • NI leaders must ‘deliver for families and businesses’ after Stormont return, says Sunak

    Rishi Sunak has travelled to Northern Ireland to mark the restoration of power-sharing at Stormont.

    The prime minister hailed a “special opportunity” at the beginning of his visit after Stormont returned on Saturday to establish a new power-sharing executive.

    Having arrived in Belfast on Sunday, the prime minister is scheduled to meet new first minister Michelle O’Neill of Sinn Féin as well as Emma Little-Pengelly of the DUP, the deputy first minister.

    The prime minister is also expected to meet the taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, amid tension with the Irish government over its legal challenge to the UK’s policy on Troubles-related offences.

    During a visit to the headquarters of Air Ambulance Northern Ireland in Lisburn last night, Sunak said political leaders should now be focussed on “delivering for families and businesses”.

    Week-in-Review: Stormont is back, but the DUP’s Brexit strains remain

    He said: “It is great to be back in Northern Ireland this evening, a special part of our United Kingdom”.

    “In the last few days, we have made significant progress towards a brighter future for people here. Yesterday, the assembly sat for the first time in two years. Tomorrow, the executive will meet.

    “Tonight, I have been meeting with volunteers and the crew at the air ambulance. It is people and services like this, and many more, that the executive can now focus on, delivering for families and businesses across Northern Ireland. And with the new deal that we have agreed, they will have both the funding and the powers to do exactly that.”

    Stormont’s assembly reconvened on Saturday after a crunch period last week which ended with the DUP announcing that it would cease its boycott of the assembly.

    A deal between the UK government and the DUP, which included £3.3 billion to stabilise finances, met the party’s concerns over post-Brexit trading arrangements. 

    Speaking this morning on Sky News, Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, leader of the DUP, has reiterated that Northern Ireland is “firmly part of the United Kingdom” despite the appointment of a nationalist first minister.

    He said: “I’m a democrat and when you fight an election sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But let’s not forget that the office of first minister, it’s a joint office.”

    He added: “We will work with other ministers in the executive to deliver for the people of Northern Ireland.”

    Asked about Michelle O’Neill’s claim that a vote on Irish reunification could happen in the next 10 years, he said: “I don’t agree with that at all”.

    “Michelle O’Neill instead of focusing on a divisive border poll, she says she wants to be a first minister for all – well, that means the unionist community.”

    The DUP leader said that polls show at least 60 per cent of people support the union, adding that there is “no evidence whatsoever” that there is a shift away from Northern Ireland wanting to be part of the UK.

    “Let’s move forward together, let’s focus on the issues that really matter to people.”

    It came after Sinn Féin first minister Michelle O’Neill told Sky News yesterday: “I believe … that we can do two things at once; we can have power-sharing, we can make it stable, we can work together every day in terms of public services while we also pursue our equally legitimate aspirations.”

    Asked if this meant there would be a unity referendum in the next decade, O’Neill said: “Yes. I believe we are in a decade of opportunity and there are so many things that are changing.

    “All the old norms, the nature of this estate, the fact that a nationalist/republican was never supposed to be first minister. This all speaks to that change.”

    Source

  • How the UK regulates sports betting

    In Britain, gambling isn’t just a leisure activity but a heavily regulated industry that’s been interwoven into the nation’s cultural and economic landscape.

    As an industry worth £14 billion a year (and counting), this meticulous regulation serves several vital functions, not least to ensure complete transparency, fairness to consumers, and the combating of illegal activities, but much more, too. And with gambling more widely accessible and even more popular than ever, implementing a safe space to enjoy betting has never been more important

    However, in order to understand the regulations surrounding sports betting, we must first delve into the gambling regulatory system as a whole, beginning with the all-important legislation covering gambling in the country.

    Just over 6 million of us here in the United Kingdom enjoy betting in at least one form. And central to UK betting regulations is the Gambling Act 2005. This Act, which applies to England, Wales and Scotland, does not merely provide a legal structure; it emphasises the country’s commitment to balancing the thrill of gambling with stringent oversight. Initially, the legislation operated under a point-of-supply framework, aka those brick-and-mortar casinos that operated in Great Britain.

    However, with the emergence of the ever-evolving digital landscape and, thus, the need for a more comprehensive approach, the Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Act 2014 ushered in a shift to a point-of-consumption regime. This change mandated online gambling operators, irrespective of their geographical location, to secure a license from the UK Gambling Commission if they intended to cater to British patrons.

    The UK Gambling Commission is the authoritative body entrusted with the mammoth task of overseeing the gambling landscape throughout England, Wales and Scotland. The Commission serves as the linchpin, issuing licenses, meticulously monitoring compliance, and overseeing the industry to ensure operators adhere to a series of stringent standards and protocols.

    The Gambling Commission also shoulders the overarching responsibility with local authorities who are responsible for granting premises licenses and ensuring everyone – from bustling casinos in the big cities to high street betting stores – operates within the well-defined legal parameters.

    Sports betting operates under a robust regulatory umbrella designed to preserve the sanctity of sporting events, protect consumers, and, ultimately, maintain the industry’s integrity.

    Sports betting operators in the UK are faced with a rigorous licensing regime controlled by the commission. This licensing mandate serves as a bulwark against unsavoury, nefarious, or outright illegal practices, meaning operators have to navigate their way through processes that include, but certainly aren’t limited to: demonstrating financial solvency; showcasing their complete commitment to responsible gambling practices and protocols; upholding fairness and transparency to thwart match-fixing, insider betting; and other activities that threaten the very spirit of sportsmanship.

    To help maintain the “fun” emphasis of sports betting, regulations are in place to enforce affordability checks by operators in an effort to ensure that players do not gamble beyond their means. This includes scrutinising the income and spending of new users, whether online or in person. Players are empowered to set deposit limits, with operators restricted from incessantly prompting increases. Moreover, rigorous age verification processes are set in place to ensure only adults can gamble.

    When it comes to advertising, a whistle-to-whistle ban is in place throughout England, Scotland and Wales which has led to a stop in promotions before and during live sports events. In 2022, it was revealed by The Committee for Advertising Practice that footballers, celebrities and social media influencers would be banned from gambling adverts under new rules.

    Furthermore, technical controls are enhanced with the introduction of maximum stake limits for specific online sports betting, helping to curb potential rapid losses. Gambling platforms must ensure a safe online community with advanced technical features to prevent fraud and potential data breaches.

    If sports betting shops, online or otherwise, fail in any part of this strict criteria, the Gambling Commission wields enforcement powers which can lead to intense investigations and sanctions for any form of regulatory infringement.

    When it comes to licensing and regulation, the Commission has the legal power to refuse to grant a licence if they have concerns about the operator’s suitability or compliance with the Gambling Act 2005. The Commission can also attach conditions to betting shop licences to address specific concerns or risks. For example, they might require a shop to limit the number of gaming machines it can have. The authority even has the power to carry out unannounced inspections of betting shops to check that they are complying with their licence conditions and the Gambling Act.

    When it comes to enforcement, the Gambling Commission can fine betting shops for breaches of the Act or their licence conditions. The fines can be very large, running into millions of pounds in some cases. One of the most recent fines involved The Entain Group, which received a £17 million penalty in August 2022 for social responsibility and anti-money laundering failures at its online and land-based businesses.

    The Commission can go even further if it deems an offence to be serious enough. In certain circumstances, it can suspend or even completely cancel the registration of a betting establishment if it is not being operated safely and responsibly.

    And, when it comes to the most serious offences, it can seek to prosecute individuals for offences under the Gambling Act.

    Source

  • Week-in-Review: Stormont is back, but the DUP’s Brexit strains remain

    After two years of incapacitation, prevarication and false dawns, the movement towards the restoration of power-sharing in Northern Ireland this week proceeded at a genuine pace. And as far as the careful choreographers in the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party) and NIO (Northern Ireland Office) are concerned, it’s generally all gone according to schedule.

    The first sign that tectonic plates of Northern Ireland politics were shifting — and shifting decisively — came with a House of Commons address from Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP leader, last week. In a debate on the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Act, after months of struggling to secure a compromise deal that will placate party hardliners, the typically tight-lipped, inexpressive Donaldson declared his intention to “step up and be a leader”. 

    He condemned those within his own party who have been “stirring up” opposition and lashed out at the hardline Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) party for accusing him of selling out the union. “A unionism that turns in on itself is not the way to go”, he instructed his audience, both within the chamber and far beyond.

    At once, Donaldson was softening his position on NI-UK post-Brexit trade and hardening his rhetoric. Those in attendance universally recognised something significant was happening: the DUP was about to bury its stridently defensive instincts, forged through decades of political rupture, and boldly declare “yes” to the NIO’s latest offer on post-Brexit trade. 

    And so it has come to pass. Just nine days on from Donaldson’s symbolic commons intervention and Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) are expected to collect in Stormont today to appoint a new first minister and deputy first minister of Northern Ireland. A new statutory guarantee of Northern Ireland’s constitutional position as an “integral part of the United Kingdom”; an end to “routine” checks on Great British goods sent to Northern Ireland; and a £3.3 billion financial package, all provided for in the UK government’s “Command Paper”, ultimately assuaged Donaldson’s remaining Stormont doubts. 

    Heaton-Harris say new deal will deliver ‘long term change that Northern Ireland needs’

    Of course, underlying and informing the DUP leader’s commons address last week was his deep political insecurity — both as the leader of his party and nominal spokesperson for unionism at large. Take also the DUP’s executive meeting on Monday, when Donaldson first presented the new deal to his party top brass. Not only did the meeting of the party’s 120-strong executive close at around 1.00 am — hours later than anticipated — but the blow-by-blow exchanges that preceded Donaldson’s bleary-eyed press conference were live-tweeted by lead loyalist critic, Jamie Bryson.

    The implication is that a DUP insider was relaying information to a party antagonist at this most sensitive moment. Sir Jeffrey subsequently insisted that the executive decision had been “decisive”, but the timing and Bryson’s tweeting suggested that supposedly white smoke emanating from DUP HQ was in fact tinged with grey. 

    The long road back to power-sharing

    The DUP first walked out of power-sharing at Stormont in February 2022 in protest against Northern Ireland’s post-Brexit trading arrangements — which, the party argued, undermined the region’s place in the Union.

    As has been well-rehearsed, the UK’s departure from the European Union created a trade border in the Irish Sea to avoid the return of a north-south border on the island of Ireland and the consequent destabilisation of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. But, more broadly, the issue for the DUP has always been that the abstract nouns that drove the Brexit argument in 2016 — namely “freedom”, “sovereignty” and “control” — have very different meanings in the six counties. The nature of Northern Ireland’s political settlement means it is fundamentally unclear where the party’s absolutist visions of Brexit and unionism converge.

    Thus, the logical and intellectual instability at the heart of the DUP’s euroscepticism was reframed as UK government betrayal and a boycott of power-sharing inaugurated. The party subsequently issued “seven tests” — party red lines Donaldson would mark a renegotiation of the so-called “Northern Ireland Protocol”, and therefore any return to Stormont, against.

    There is no doubt that the 76-page Command Paper entitled “Safeguarding the Union”, published on Wednesday, falls short when it comes to the DUP’s totemic “tests”. That the document fails to meet the party’s incredibly high bar has been admitted by former first minister Arlene Foster, who declared this week that the red lines, after all the posturing and grassroots priming, were not in fact “sacrosanct”. In the long view, these “tests” — which deemed last year’s Windsor Framework (Rishi Sunak’s initial solution to the sticky protocol problem) insufficient — merely served to make the DUP’s inevitable climbdown more difficult than it needed to be.

    With this in mind, the real job of the new “Command Paper” was to provide a means by which the DUP could soften its position on the protocol in a way that best saves the party’s blushes among an expectant unionist community. It is a task the document enthusiastically rises to. 

    The paper’s focus on East-West (UK-NI) arrangements, including a future “Council”; the patriotic rebranding of the so-called “green” UK-NI trading lane; and generally soppy substance are all aimed to appease likely unionist critics. In one telling section, the Command Paper — noting increasing activism by the Irish government around the possibility of Irish reunification — also “sets out a series of measures to visibly evidence the government’s commitment to Northern Ireland —  and to strengthen it further — as an integral part of the United Kingdom both now, and for the years ahead.”

    In fact, Command Paper is so unapologetic in identifying its unionist audience that Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) leader Colum Eastwood argues it undermines the Good Friday Agreement by moving away “from the principle of rigorous impartiality” that the UK must abide in Northern Ireland. 

    Donaldson’s dilemma

    The force of the Command Paper’s arguments and its prospective solidifying of NI’s place in the union, rather like Donaldson’s impassioned commons address, is revealing of its underlying weakness. Because, to some shades of unionist opinion, this latest deal merely constitutes another layer of betrayal — and one to which the DUP has now willingly assented. 

    Take Traditional Unionist Voice, the most pointedly anti-protocol party in Northern Ireland. Its leader, Jim Allister, has blasted Donaldson as a “Protocol enabler” and claimed that Northern Ireland “continues to be treated as EU territory”. Alongside Allister, perennial thorn in the DUP’s side Jaime Bryson has argued that ministers who accept a role in the coming Stormont administration would be “implementing the subjugation of the Acts of Union”. Allister, Bryson, alongside Reform UK deputy leader (and candidate in the upcoming Wellingborough by-election) Ben Habib and former Labour MP Baroness Kate Hoey, had commissioned former attorney general for NI John Larkin KC to issue a verdict on the deal. Reporting on Friday, Larkin suggested that it does not “remove customs and regulatory border in the Irish Sea”.

    But Donaldson will not merely be concerned by the threat of electoral besiegement from external unionist forces. His own party also happens to be split over the deal.

    In the House of Commons on Thursday, during the debate on crucial legislation underpinning the deal, Donaldson’s MPs took turns expressing their issues. Indeed, as the DUP leader talked up the positives of the agreement he negotiated, the especially strident Sammy Wilson took it upon himself to knock them down. At one point, the DUP leader turned to his party chief whip to “urge [him] to read all the document”.

    DUP’s Sammy Wilson blasts ‘Brexit-betraying’ government as deal to restore Stormont announced

    Meanwhile, South Antrim MP Paul Girvan cited concerns about diversion of trade (goods that were sourced in Great Britain but now in Ireland); and Carla Lockhart referenced the EU’s retained role in NI. In the House of Lords, former deputy leader Nigel Dodds asserted that “the Irish Sea border… still exists”. 

    It means, although Donaldson successfully navigated the deal through the DUP’s executive on Monday, both intra- and extra-party critics will continue to pore over the command paper in the coming weeks. It makes for a tense, uneasy settlement. There is also no disguising the fact that Donaldson’s apparent negotiating “triumph” on the protocol will culminate in a Sinn Fein MLA, Michelle O’Neill, becoming first minister of Northern Ireland.

    Forward to power-sharing

    Only time will tell whether the unionist community shares Bryson and Allister’s outrage to the extent that their criticism will bolster the TUV in future assembly and general elections. But internal pressure on Donaldson, informed by sincerely held misgivings about the deal and the perception of the TUV threat, looks set to build over the coming days.

    Sinn Féin claim united Ireland is ‘within touching distance’ rejected by UK government

    But perhaps more significantly, the events of the past few days are illustrative of the fact that the unionist political community ceases to speak with one voice. The TUV, the DUP and the Ulster Unionist Party (which has also expressed misgivings about Donaldson’s deal) are in direct competition for votes. Vote splitting, simply, could see the non-aligned Alliance Party continue to win seats in supposed unionist strongholds.

    Moreover, if nationalist sympathies now coalesce around a Sinn Fein first minister, it will not be the now-reformed protocol that threatens Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom — but unionist fracture and internal acrimony. With Sinn Fein also advancing in the Republic, the magnitude of this moment can scarcely be understated; and unionism looks set to enter the coming period at odds with itself. 

    Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Twitter here.

    Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website, providing comprehensive coverage of UK politics. Subscribe to our daily newsletter here.



    Source

  • ‘Is it common for law firms to deduct the cost of your practising certificate from your final pay cheque?’ 

    Departing associate questions deduction

    In the latest installment of our Career Conundrums series, a departing lawyer raises concerns about the firm’s decision to deduct the cost of her practicing certificate from her final paycheck.

    “I am a commercial lawyer and having handed in my notice the firm is deducting the cost of my practising certificate from my final pay cheque. This certainly didn’t happen when I left my old firm and wondered if the readers of Legal Cheek would consider this to be standard?”

    If you have a career conundrum, email us at team@legalcheek.com.

    The post ‘Is it common for law firms to deduct the cost of your practising certificate from your final pay cheque?’  appeared first on Legal Cheek.

    Source

  • Rochdale by-election: Ex-Labour MP Simon Danczuk to stand for Reform UK

    Simon Danczuk is standing in the Rochdale by-election for the Reform party.

    The former Labour MP served in parliament from 2010 until 2017 but was blocked from standing in the snap election called by Theresa May after he sent explicit messages to a 17 year-old girl.

    He looks set to face George Galloway, another former Labour MP, in the by-election, which will be held on 29 February after the death of Tony Lloyd last month.

    Galloway has said he will stand on a pro-Palestine ticket to “teach Starmer a lesson”.

    Galloway came third in a by-election in Batley and Spen in 2021, polling 21.9 per cent of the vote in a fraught contest.

    The Labour Party candidate, Azhar Ali, is the leader of the Labour group on Lancashire county council, and has called for an “immediate” ceasefire in Gaza.

    Announcing his decision to stand for Reform in the Rochdale by-election, Danczuk told The Sun: “The Labour Party is just focused on the North London view of things now. They have gone from work to woke.

    “I was traditional Labour. It meant standing up for people who were working, getting people off benefits into work, reducing illegal immigration.

    He added: “Where is the Labour Party on all that now? Rochdale has been taken for granted by Labour for too long”.

    He also apologised for the texting scandal, admitting it was inappropriate and stupid and declaring: “There is no fool like an old fool”.

    Danczuk stood as an independent in the 2017 general election, when he polled just 883 votes to Lloyd’s 29,035.

    Source

  • My experience of the SQE so far

    A law grad and training contract offer holder details their journey through SQE1


    Like most others starting on the SQE, I too had heard the horror stories — too much content, a nightmare to book the assessments and long, tiring exam days. Having recently sat both FLK1 and FLK2 for the first time, this is how I found it.

    Studying for SQE1

    Having already done a law degree in England, I started preparing for the SQE1 thinking that I might have it easier. But the reality was that a few years had passed since those contract and tort modules and my memory was more than a bit rusty. So, as it turned out, I had to put just as much time into studying for some of the subjects I’d already covered on my law degree, as for those I hadn’t previously encountered.

    The large volume of content that the SQE1 tests on was also something to get used to in the initial weeks. Even with the support of a preparation course, I often felt like I was just constantly learning new information and felt doubtful if I was actually absorbing anything. I was used to studying law with cases mapping out the nuanced progression of a rule over time and applying that knowledge in problem questions and essays, while the SQE1 is a multiple-choice question exam. I certainly found myself over-analysing and questioning the answer choices, falling back into the habit of covering all bases as we’re taught to do in a law degree. It also didn’t help that the SQE1 answer choices are in a ‘single best answer’ format, so you’re not necessarily choosing the right answer from a selection of wrong ones — there could be more than one response that answer the question correctly, just that there’s only one which answers it the best.

    It took me a few weeks to get into a good study routine, force myself to be consistent and stick to a schedule. Once I did this, I found myself feeling less overwhelmed by how much there was to get through, because it just came down to methodically following a plan. It’s important to remember that there’s going to be some subjects you get the hang of really easily, and some that you just can’t seem to get right. Because the SQE1 is a pass/fail exam, try not to get too bogged down by wanting to learn everything in all the subjects perfectly, and instead, be strategic about your strengths and weaknesses and the areas that you can realistically improve on by dedicating a few extra study hours. Analysing your scores across the different subjects in practice questions and mock exams is helpful to try and understand this — while it may take a bit of extra time, it’s definitely worth it because it means your revision can be more focused.

    The 2024 Legal Cheek Law Schools Most List

    Having a clear schedule and sticking to it also means that you have better boundaries when it comes to juggling work, family and social commitments, and don’t feel guilty about taking time off so you don’t end up burned out.

    Revising for SQE1

    When revising I really had to resist the temptation to try and perfect every little bit of information on the SQE1 syllabus. The SRA website provides an outline of the percentage of questions that will be asked from each subject area — it definitely helped me to keep this in mind when revising, so that I wasn’t spending hours and hours on a tiny section of the course that might only come up in a couple of questions on the exam.

    I also tried to balance revising content with doing practice questions every day when I was revising, since I found that there was sometimes a gap between knowing the information and applying it to the MCQs. Doing mock exams is also quite helpful to figure out when you start losing focus and begin feeling tired under timed conditions, so that you can factor in some time to take a water break in the exam.

    I made sure that I wasn’t doing too many practice questions in the last couple of days before the exam and focused more on any loose ends in the actual content to try and keep my mind fresh for the 5 hours of MCQs on assessment day.

    Sitting the exams

    After the initial struggle of booking a centre to sit FLK 1 and FLK 2, there wasn’t anything unexpected about the process of sitting either exam — just the usual things. Arriving well ahead of time, having the right ID documents to hand, wearing comfortable clothes — as for any exam.

    Perhaps the most challenging aspect was trying not get demotivated when faced with a series of challenging questions and ensuring I wasn’t spending too much time on any one question — I found it helpful to use the ‘flag’ function to earmark questions I was struggling with and come back to it at the end to try and work the answer out. I certainly found my focus wavering around the halfway mark and really had to force myself to concentrate on answering the questions.

    Of course, I’ve only just sat the exams, so I haven’t got my results to hand yet. But it might help those who are feeling a bit lost about preparing for and sitting the SQE1 exams to hear about a recent experience of doing the same, for what it’s worth!

    ‘SQE Student’ is a law grad and training contract offer holder.

    The post My experience of the SQE so far appeared first on Legal Cheek.

    Source

  • Rachel Reeves warned she is ‘boxing herself in’ with Labour tax pledges

    RShadow chancellor Rachel Reeves has been warned she is “boxing herself in” over Labour’s tax pledges. 

    Ed Balls, the former shadow chancellor, said Reeves was “absolutely removing room for manoeuvre” and that could prove problematic if the Labour Party’s “fiscal inheritance turns out to be tougher” than expected.

    Balls’ comments, made on his Political Currency podcast which he hosts with George Osborne, came after Reeves told Labour’s business conference yesterday there would be no rise in corporation tax during the first term of a Labour government.

    Reeves announced Labour would not increase corporation tax from its current level of 25 per cent — a pledge that was criticised by those on the left of the party.

    Balls said: “I think the thing which worries me is the extent to which Rachel is choosing, on tax, to box herself in quite a lot.

    “She doesn’t want to raise taxes on working people, she doesn’t want to raise wealth taxes, she’s now not going to have a bank bonus cap and she has also announced at the Labour business conference there’ll be no rise in corporation tax either in the first parliament.

    “And when you think, you know: No rise on taxes on working people, no wealth taxes, no [cap] on bankers’ bonuses, no rise in corporation tax.

    “If the fiscal inheritance turns out to be tougher, if the pressures on public services are as people expect, this is going to be a very, very difficult task for her and she’s absolutely removing room for manoeuvre.”

    The comments come amid significant media speculation that Labour could be about to ditch its £28 billion green energy investment pledge. 

    In an interview with Sky News, shadow chancellor Reeves refused to state whether she stands by that plan and said it would depend on the financial state of the country.

    “The fiscal rules will come first and all of our policies will be subject to the iron discipline,” she said.

    Meanwhile, Labour Party sources told The Guardian that the £28 billion figure will be dropped but the broader commitment to boosting green infrastructure will be retained.

    A shadow minister told the newspaper: “The £28 billion is definitely going as a figure. It will be changed to specific outcomes linked to specific investment, rather than being a random figure to be allocated at a later date.”

    Source

  • Law student recruited by solicitor after meeting at Playboy casino awarded nearly £30k by employment tribunal

    ‘Extraordinary’ case


    A law student has been awarded nearly £30,000 by an employment tribunal after being recruited by a consultant solicitor she met in a Playboy casino.

    The student, known only as BR, was working as a dancer at the club whilst completing her Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) part-time when she was recruited by consultant solicitor, AD, to work as his “personal legal secretary”.

    After being invited to dinner by AD, she was offered a base salary of £14,000 per year, plus a bonus of 10% of what she billed and received, plus 5% of what the AD billed and received. Whilst the scope of her job was unclear, one role accepted by the tribunal was “to pick up clients at night when they visited high end restaurants and bars”.

    She was also told that in her role AD was “God”, and she was “an obedient little slave creature”. This, AD said, was the only way she would learn and achieve her potential.

    The now deceased solicitor did not, however, provide a contract or take any details to pay BR’s wages. The student worked either from her own home, or from AD’s house.

    The 2024 Legal Cheek Firms Most List

    <a href=" September 2022 an employment tribunal found that BR was employed by AD, dismissing a further claim that BR was an employee of the firm at which AD was a consultant solicitor. At the time, employment judge Martin described the case as “extraordinary”, saying that AD had “acted entirely inappropriately” towards the student.

    In a more recent ruling, another employment tribunal found that BR had suffered unauthorised deductions from her wages (having not been paid for her work), a breach of contract in relation to being terminated without notice pay, a breach of AD’s duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars, harassment related to sex, and victimisation.

    BR was awarded £28,986.85p in total, including £18,000 compensation for injury to feelings, nearly £5,000 in unpaid wages, and £5,000 interest.

    The post Law student recruited by solicitor after meeting at Playboy casino awarded nearly £30k by employment tribunal appeared first on Legal Cheek.

    Source

  • Theo Clarke: ‘My inquiry on birth trauma can ensure the experience of mums drives policy’

    The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on birth trauma I co-chair has now launched an inquiry to ensure care for new mums improves dramatically.

    Already the government has responded to this campaign with several key announcements in last month’s Women’s Health Strategy.

    Comprehensive physical care for those who experience serious tears during childbirth will be rolled out by March. Specialist maternal mental health services will also be available to women in every part of England by March. New mums will receive a comprehensive check up with their GP within eight weeks, focused solely on her mental and physical health.

    However, from my own experience of birth trauma following the birth of my daughter in 2022 and the experience of brave mums who have contacted me after I launched this campaign, there is still much to do.

    My own story is sadly not unusual but it has had a profound effect and driven my desire to improve care for new mums in my role as an MP. I suffered a third-degree tear after 40 hours of labour and had emergency surgery after I started bleeding heavily. It was the most terrifying moment of my life as I was wheeled into an operating theatre just at the moment I wanted to hold my daughter in my arms. The brilliant medical team saved my life but not all the care I received was good.

    Afterwards, back on a ward, I rang a bell to get help because my daughter was crying and I was unable to move. A woman came in and simply said, ‘not my baby, not my problem’. It was unacceptable.

    Later I began to understand that what had happened to me was not a priority and that often the focus was on the baby and not the mum even if they had suffered mental and/or physical trauma. I believe mum and baby need to be treated more as a package, especially in those first months.

    There remain safety concerns in maternity units that we are all too familiar with following many incidents across the country. Staffing remains an issue too and the government is responding with more money to recruit midwives but pressures remain.

    There also needs to be cultural change so that more compassion as well as support and help comes forward for new mums who are often scared, in pain and possibly suffering mental anguish in the hours and days after a traumatic birth. I would never want any new mum to hear someone say to them they simply didn’t care because they were not looking after their baby.

    The fact is women’s health has too often been a taboo subject in society and certainly within parliament and government. I am happy to change that with the help of brilliant organisations like the Birth Trauma Association and Mumsnet and my co-chair Rosie Duffield MP. I have even held the first ever parliamentary debate on birth trauma and I will continue to highlight it whenever I can.

    The inquiry then is a big part of this. It will take place throughout February and March. Its aim is to collate evidence to the government for practical and achievable recommendations aimed at further improving care and support for new mothers and their partners.

    It will hear evidence from doctors, experts, campaigners but most importantly from mums. I want mums from across the country to get in touch with their experiences and views. We have much more to do to make further progress and those experiences are so important.

    The call for evidence can be found at: www.theo-clarke.org.uk/birth-trauma

    Source