These are the questions currently running through employees minds when severing their employment today. Whilst the Employment Rights Act 2025 extends the time limit from bringing most claims, such as unfair dismissal, from three to six months in October, Tribunals are already reporting a wait of up to four years. Perhaps more people will be prepared to negotiate hard a good settlement agreement now?
A judgment was handed down by the Court of Appeal recently considering the criteria required when applying to seek permission to re-open an appeal or a permission to appeal application. A panel of two Lord Justices of Appeal refused, after an oral hearing, to re-open a permission to appeal application. The respondents did not appear but some had sent in short written representations objecting to the application to re-open the permission to appeal decision.
It is interesting to note that the Lord Justice of Appeal, who originally refused the permission to appeal application on paper, had recused himself for another Lord Justice to order at an oral hearing that the application to re-open be adjourned to a further oral hearing before a two-judge court.
Therefore, in total, four Court of Appeal judges considered the case.
If you are planning to sell your business here are some points that you ought to consider now:-
1) Tax efficiency
2) Contract renewals
3) Share options
4) Employment contracts
5) Intellectual property
6) Companies House filings
The above are all likely to receive attention during the due diligence given to the transaction by the purchaser.
The fall in the number of construction contracts has been evidenced by a 25% insolvency increase in building firms since the pandemic.
Escalating inflation, delays in significant infrastructure projects, a drop in the construction of new homes and the cost increments of materials are the chief culprits here.
Flat sales in London are up nearly a quarter compared to pre-pandemic conditions and house sales are showing a smaller yet still significant increase. In prime central London renters are being forced to pay more as there are fewer deals on offer, with particular demand in up to two bed properties. Suburban rents have increased even more so.
New leases and renewals are being reported by some of the commercial property mega corporations with rents holding firm even though foot fall remains slightly subdued due to hybrid working. Recent builds especially are of interest.
The First Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (FTT) has the jurisdiction to resolve service charge reasonableness disputes such as apportionment and that any agreements on this and other service charge questions that might have been agreed to in the lease are void for FTT challenge purposes, was held by the Supreme Court recently.
To arrive at this decision the Court had to examine section 27A(6) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985:-
27A Liability to pay service charges: jurisdiction
(1) An application may be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether a service charge is payable and, if it is, as to—
(a) the person by whom it is payable,
(b) the person to whom it is payable,
(c) the amount which is payable,
(d) the date at or by which it is payable, and
(e) the manner in which it is payable.
(2) Subsection (1) applies whether or not any payment has been made.
(3) An application may also be made to the appropriate tribunal for a determination whether, if costs were incurred for services, repairs, maintenance, improvements, insurance or management of any specified description, a service charge would be payable for the costs and, if it would, as to—
(a) the person by whom it would be payable,
(b) the person to whom it would be payable,
(c) the amount which would be payable,
(d) the date at or by which it would be payable, and
(e) the manner in which it would be payable.
(4) No application under subsection (1) or (3) may be made in respect of a matter which—
(a) has been agreed or admitted by the tenant,
(b) has been, or is to be, referred to arbitration pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement to which the tenant is a party,
(c) has been the subject of determination by a court, or
(d) has been the subject of determination by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to a post-dispute arbitration agreement.
(5) But the tenant is not to be taken to have agreed or admitted any matter by reason only of having made any payment.
(6) An agreement by the tenant of a dwelling (other than a post-dispute arbitration agreement) is void in so far as it purports to provide for a determination—
(a) in a particular manner, or
(b) on particular evidence,
of any question which may be the subject of an application under subsection (1) or (3).
(7) The jurisdiction conferred on the appropriate tribunal in respect of any matter by virtue of this section is in addition to any jurisdiction of a court in respect of the matter.