- Published on
Legal Terms – Enabling Statute
A statute that grants rights or powers to any entity or individual.
A statute that grants rights or powers to any entity or individual.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Enactment
legislative Act of Parliament, a Measure of the General Synod (refer to Church of England), an order, or any subordinate legislation, including any specific provision within these (e.g., a particular section or article). Delegated legislation does not constitute an enactment under the Local Government Act 1992.
legislative Act of Parliament, a Measure of the General Synod (refer to Church of England), an order, or any subordinate legislation, including any specific provision within these (e.g., a particular section or article). Delegated legislation does not constitute an enactment under the Local Government Act 1992.
- Published on
Legal Terms - inventions by employees
Products, equipment, or methods developed by an employee throughout the course of their job. According to Section 39 of the Patents Act 1977, inventions created by an employee during the execution of their regular duties, which are likely to result in an invention, or during any responsibilities that entail a specific obligation to advance the employer's business, are owned by the employer. These stipulations are immutable inside an employment contract. The employee may get compensation from the Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks of the Intellectual Property Office if the invention significantly benefits the employer, however this situation is exceedingly rare. Copyrighted works are owned by the employer if created by the employee during the course of employment; nonetheless, the burden of proof lies with the employer in the event of a dispute. A person is presumed to be the author of a work if their name is publicly displayed on it (MEI Fields Designs Ltd v Saffron Cards and Gifts Ltd [2018] EWHC 1332 (IPEC); Liffe Administration and Management v Pinkava & Anor [2007] EWCA Civ 217).
Products, equipment, or methods developed by an employee throughout the course of their job. According to Section 39 of the Patents Act 1977, inventions created by an employee during the execution of their regular duties, which are likely to result in an invention, or during any responsibilities that entail a specific obligation to advance the employer's business, are owned by the employer. These stipulations are immutable inside an employment contract. The employee may get compensation from the Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks of the Intellectual Property Office if the invention significantly benefits the employer, however this situation is exceedingly rare. Copyrighted works are owned by the employer if created by the employee during the course of employment; nonetheless, the burden of proof lies with the employer in the event of a dispute. A person is presumed to be the author of a work if their name is publicly displayed on it (MEI Fields Designs Ltd v Saffron Cards and Gifts Ltd [2018] EWHC 1332 (IPEC); Liffe Administration and Management v Pinkava & Anor [2007] EWCA Civ 217).
- Published on
egal Terms - employee share scheme
A mechanism for dispersing corporate profits to employees, either through the allocation of pre-existing shares or by granting options to purchase shares under advantageous conditions. Some systems offer tax concessions.
A mechanism for dispersing corporate profits to employees, either through the allocation of pre-existing shares or by granting options to purchase shares under advantageous conditions. Some systems offer tax concessions.
- Published on
Legal Terms – Employer
one (natural or juristic, such as a company) who hires another, often an employee or worker, to do tasks under their supervision and authority in exchange for remuneration or compensation (see to contract of employment). Companies are deemed linked employers if one exerts control over the other or if both are under the authority of the same entity.
one (natural or juristic, such as a company) who hires another, often an employee or worker, to do tasks under their supervision and authority in exchange for remuneration or compensation (see to contract of employment). Companies are deemed linked employers if one exerts control over the other or if both are under the authority of the same entity.
- Published on
Legal Terms - emergency Powers
Authorities granted by governmental rules in a case of emergency. A state of emergency is proclaimed by royal decree pursuant to the Emergency Powers Acts of 1920 and 1964, as well as the Civil Contingencies Act of 2004. A proclamation, valid for one month and subject to renewal, may be made in response to threats to the nation's key resources, such as significant strikes or natural disasters. The rules may grant government departments, the military forces, and others any authorities essential for ensuring the supply and distribution of essentials and the preservation of public peace and safety. The Coronavirus Act 2020 conferred emergency powers upon the UK Government to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. The Act conferred upon the government discretionary authority to: restrict or halt public assemblies; detain individuals suspected of COVID-19 infection; intervene across various sectors to mitigate disease transmission and alleviate the strain on public health services; and support healthcare professionals and those economically impacted. The Act encompasses the National Health Service, social care, educational institutions, law enforcement, the Border Force, municipal councils, funeral services, and judicial tribunals.
Authorities granted by governmental rules in a case of emergency. A state of emergency is proclaimed by royal decree pursuant to the Emergency Powers Acts of 1920 and 1964, as well as the Civil Contingencies Act of 2004. A proclamation, valid for one month and subject to renewal, may be made in response to threats to the nation's key resources, such as significant strikes or natural disasters. The rules may grant government departments, the military forces, and others any authorities essential for ensuring the supply and distribution of essentials and the preservation of public peace and safety. The Coronavirus Act 2020 conferred emergency powers upon the UK Government to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. The Act conferred upon the government discretionary authority to: restrict or halt public assemblies; detain individuals suspected of COVID-19 infection; intervene across various sectors to mitigate disease transmission and alleviate the strain on public health services; and support healthcare professionals and those economically impacted. The Act encompasses the National Health Service, social care, educational institutions, law enforcement, the Border Force, municipal councils, funeral services, and judicial tribunals.
- Published on
Legal Terms - emergency Protection order
A court order pursuant to the Children Act 1989 that authorizes a local authority or the NSPCC to remove a child to appropriate accommodation for a maximum of eight days (with the option to request a seven-day extension) if there is reasonable cause to suspect that the child is experiencing or is at risk of significant harm unless the order is issued. The order grants the applicant *parental responsibility to the extent that it advances the child's welfare (according to the welfare principle). In certain instances, it may be more advantageous to expel the abuser from the residence rather than the child. The Children Act 1989 mandates the incorporation of an exclusion provision inside an emergency protection order. This results in the abuser's exclusion from the family residence. The order can only be issued if another individual residing in the same household as the kid consents to the exclusion order and is capable and willing to adequately care for the child.
A court order pursuant to the Children Act 1989 that authorizes a local authority or the NSPCC to remove a child to appropriate accommodation for a maximum of eight days (with the option to request a seven-day extension) if there is reasonable cause to suspect that the child is experiencing or is at risk of significant harm unless the order is issued. The order grants the applicant *parental responsibility to the extent that it advances the child's welfare (according to the welfare principle). In certain instances, it may be more advantageous to expel the abuser from the residence rather than the child. The Children Act 1989 mandates the incorporation of an exclusion provision inside an emergency protection order. This results in the abuser's exclusion from the family residence. The order can only be issued if another individual residing in the same household as the kid consents to the exclusion order and is capable and willing to adequately care for the child.
- Published on
Legal Terms - Emoluments
It refer to any pay, wages, fees, incidental benefits, or other forms of compensation associated with employment. Sections 62(2) and 6(1) of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 impose income tax on an individual's emoluments in accordance with the regulations governing *employment income. In contrast, the basis for National Insurance contributions is derived from earnings and designated benefits in kind. Consequently, a payment upon the cessation of work that exceeds the tax-exempt threshold incurs an income tax liability, but does not incur a National Insurance charge. The differentiation is examined in HMRC v Forde & McHugh Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 692.
It refer to any pay, wages, fees, incidental benefits, or other forms of compensation associated with employment. Sections 62(2) and 6(1) of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 impose income tax on an individual's emoluments in accordance with the regulations governing *employment income. In contrast, the basis for National Insurance contributions is derived from earnings and designated benefits in kind. Consequently, a payment upon the cessation of work that exceeds the tax-exempt threshold incurs an income tax liability, but does not incur a National Insurance charge. The differentiation is examined in HMRC v Forde & McHugh Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 692.
- Published on
Legal Terms – Employee
An individual who operates under the supervision and authority of another (the *employer) in exchange for remuneration or salary. An employee operates under a "contract of service" for the employer, while an independent contractor, engaged to execute a specific task, operates under a "contract for services" and is self-employed. The disparity is significant, as employees receive greater protection under employment law compared to independent workers. The presence or absence of an employer–employee connection dictates the expectations and obligations that can be anticipated from both parties, such as compensation, taxation, leave entitlements, and the need to complete labor. The determination of an individual's status as an employee is regulated by many judicial standards, however it has faced numerous conflicting challenges in recent years due to the emergence of innovative and flexible working arrangements (see Uber BV and others v Aslam and others [2021]). UKSC 5; Pimlico Plumbers Limited and Another v Smith [2018] UKSC 29; Independent Workers Union of Great Britain v Central Arbitration Committee [2018] EWHC 1939 (Administrative). Factors pertinent to evaluating the existence of an employer–employee relationship may encompass the degree of control exerted by the employer over the worker, the mutuality of obligations (i.e., the employee's duty to perform work and the employer's obligation to provide it), the contractual stipulations and entitlements, and the worker's ability to engage with another employer; nonetheless, this is not an exhaustive enumeration, and additional factors may be considered by a court or employment tribunal.
An individual who operates under the supervision and authority of another (the *employer) in exchange for remuneration or salary. An employee operates under a "contract of service" for the employer, while an independent contractor, engaged to execute a specific task, operates under a "contract for services" and is self-employed. The disparity is significant, as employees receive greater protection under employment law compared to independent workers. The presence or absence of an employer–employee connection dictates the expectations and obligations that can be anticipated from both parties, such as compensation, taxation, leave entitlements, and the need to complete labor. The determination of an individual's status as an employee is regulated by many judicial standards, however it has faced numerous conflicting challenges in recent years due to the emergence of innovative and flexible working arrangements (see Uber BV and others v Aslam and others [2021]). UKSC 5; Pimlico Plumbers Limited and Another v Smith [2018] UKSC 29; Independent Workers Union of Great Britain v Central Arbitration Committee [2018] EWHC 1939 (Administrative). Factors pertinent to evaluating the existence of an employer–employee relationship may encompass the degree of control exerted by the employer over the worker, the mutuality of obligations (i.e., the employee's duty to perform work and the employer's obligation to provide it), the contractual stipulations and entitlements, and the worker's ability to engage with another employer; nonetheless, this is not an exhaustive enumeration, and additional factors may be considered by a court or employment tribunal.
- Published on
Courtney and Fairbairn Ltd v Tolaini Brothers (Hotels) Ltd (1974) Court of Appeal
The defendants, as property developers, sought to construct a motel, a gas station, and a hotel on a five-acre parcel in Hertfordshire. The plaintiffs, as building contractors, proposed to provide the defendants with a financing source for the development in exchange for securing the building contracts for the projects. The plaintiffs requested confirmation from the defendants regarding whether the introduction would result in a financial arrangement.
…you will be prepared to instruct your quantity surveyor to negotiate
fair and reasonable contract sums in respect of each of the three projects
as they arise. (These would, incidentally be based upon agreed estimates
of the net cost of work and general overheads with a margin for profit of
5%) which, I am sure you will agree, is indeed reasonable.
The plaintiffs sought written consent to their terms, which the defendants supplied. The finance was appropriately established between the defendants and the financier presented by the plaintiffs; however, the parties failed to reach an agreement on the terms for the building work, leading the defendants to engage a different contractor. It was determined that no enforceable contract existed to award the building work to the plaintiffs. The court would not enforce a simple agreement to agree. The price was deferred for subsequent negotiation, as stated by Lord Denning MR:
the price in a building contract is of fundamental importance. It is so
essential a term that there is no contract unless the price is agreed or there
is an agreed method of ascertaining it, not dependent on the negotiations
of the two parties themselves… A contract to negotiate, like a contract to
enter into a contract, is not a contract known to the law.
His lordship also pointed out that:
…if they had left the price to be agreed by a third person such as an
arbitrator, it would have been different.
The defendants, as property developers, sought to construct a motel, a gas station, and a hotel on a five-acre parcel in Hertfordshire. The plaintiffs, as building contractors, proposed to provide the defendants with a financing source for the development in exchange for securing the building contracts for the projects. The plaintiffs requested confirmation from the defendants regarding whether the introduction would result in a financial arrangement.
…you will be prepared to instruct your quantity surveyor to negotiate
fair and reasonable contract sums in respect of each of the three projects
as they arise. (These would, incidentally be based upon agreed estimates
of the net cost of work and general overheads with a margin for profit of
5%) which, I am sure you will agree, is indeed reasonable.
The plaintiffs sought written consent to their terms, which the defendants supplied. The finance was appropriately established between the defendants and the financier presented by the plaintiffs; however, the parties failed to reach an agreement on the terms for the building work, leading the defendants to engage a different contractor. It was determined that no enforceable contract existed to award the building work to the plaintiffs. The court would not enforce a simple agreement to agree. The price was deferred for subsequent negotiation, as stated by Lord Denning MR:
the price in a building contract is of fundamental importance. It is so
essential a term that there is no contract unless the price is agreed or there
is an agreed method of ascertaining it, not dependent on the negotiations
of the two parties themselves… A contract to negotiate, like a contract to
enter into a contract, is not a contract known to the law.
His lordship also pointed out that:
…if they had left the price to be agreed by a third person such as an
arbitrator, it would have been different.
