Introduction Last year’s decision of the Employment Tribunal in Scott v Walker Morris LLP sheds light on steps that LLPs and partnerships ought to be taking in relation to their retirement provisions and how they deal with partners or LLP members (all referred to in this article as “partners”) who do not wish to retire….
Losses resulting from expulsion following whistleblowing can be very substantial, and there is no statutory limit on the amount of compensation that can be awarded.
But in some cases the expulsion of the whistleblower may:
In such circumstances it may be argued by the continuing LLP members that the chain of causation between the whistleblowing and the whistleblower’s loss brought about by the expulsion of the whistleblower has been broken, and that accordingly no recoverable loss arises.
The Court of Appeal decision earlier this year in Wilsons Solicitors & others v Roberts brings such scenarios sharply back into focus.
(This article was first published on the Kluwer Mediation Blog on 7 March 2017)
…the typical all-powerful and largely irreplaceable partner of yore has evolved to become a powerless, placeholder partner, keeping the chair warm for the next incumbent of his post. He is the counterpoint to, and the prey of, the predator partner.
This has radically altered how many partnership disputes, especially in the professions, tend to arise and are resolved.
LLP members might be entitled to protection under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/246) (TUPE). This consideration is at least in part prompted by the outcome of the recent Bates van Winkelhof case in the Supreme Court.
There are many circumstances in which an LLP member can end up with personal liability for either individual liabilities of the LLP or a share of the LLP’s losses over a particular period. This article examines just a couple of related examples as to how LLP members can end up bearing very substantial LLP losses….
“… any partner or member who agrees to devote their full time and attention to the practice may well be a “worker” …” The case of Bates van Winkelhof v Clyde & Co in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) has made new law, answering the question: can an equity member of an LLP be a…
“… if the answer to any of these questions is, “No,” there may be a problem …” Following the Supreme Court judgment in Seldon, how do professional practices quickly determine whether or not they should be taking advice on their current partner or LLP member retirement provisions, with a view to minimising the risk of…
The recent case of Eaton v Caulfield & others (an unfair prejudice petition brought under section 994 of the Companies Act 2006, coupled with a just and equitable winding up petition under section 122(1)(g) of the Insolvency Act 1986) highlights the difficulties faced by LLP members who do not have an LLP members’ agreement setting out their…
“… Typically the senior partner becomes complacent about the fabulous hand of cards that life has dealt him and starts to presume that he can do no wrong …” It may come as no surprise that amongst professional practices that have no provision in their partnership deed for regular senior partner elections, an unusually high proportion…
…Recessions bring out the worst in people… A recession has a way of exposing weaknesses in legal drafting. As practices try to respond to the economic climate, management teams consult the fine print of their partnership deed or LLP members’ agreement, and may find it wanting. This article describes and explains the importance of a…
“… the number of insureds under a practice’s professional indemnity insurance can easily double every fifteen or so years …” (First published in the Law Society Gazette on 20 August 2009) Last year a letter dropped though the door of numerous former employees of Merricks LLP, putting them on notice that if certain of the…
