Direct Access News

Business-people-interacting-to-each-other-000058716240_Medium.jpg

UK company law is a complex and multifaceted area of legislation that governs how companies are formed, operated, and regulated in the United Kingdom. It encompasses a wide range of legal matters including the incorporation of companies, corporate governance, directors' duties, shareholders' rights, and issues related to insolvency, among others. This body of law serves as a framework for businesses to operate within, providing them with a clear set of rules and procedures to follow.

Historically, UK company law has evolved significantly since the advent of the Joint Stock Companies Act of 1844, which first introduced the concept of incorporated companies. This was followed by the Limited Liability Act of 1855, which provided shareholders with protection from personal liability for company debts. The Companies Act of 1862 then consolidated these laws, forming the basis of modern UK company law. In the 20th and 21st centuries, UK company law has seen significant changes, notably through the Companies Act 1985, which consolidated the legislation relating to company law, the Companies Act 2006, which is the principal source of UK company law today, and the implementation of the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act 2015, which introduced various measures to reduce red tape and increase transparency, including the PSC register.

Legal issues that commonly arise in the realm of UK company law include:

1. Using the wrong company structure: The legal structure of a company determines its tax implications and the financial responsibilities and liabilities of its owners. It is crucial for businesses to choose their legal structure carefully from the start to avoid complications later on​​.
2. Contracts: Having solid, legally enforceable contracts in place between a company and its customers and suppliers is key to protecting against future disputes. This includes terms and conditions, cookie policies, privacy policies, and other similar agreements​.
3. Intellectual Property & Copyright Infringement: Businesses need to be mindful of using copyrighted materials and resources and should also ensure to protect their own intellectual property. Failing to do so can result in legal disputes further down the line​.
4. Not having agreements in place from the start: It's important to have legal agreements in place from the beginning, particularly between co-founders and shareholders, to settle any future disagreements and legal complications​.
5. Employee-related issues: Companies need to provide their employees with adequate formal contracts and respect their legal rights, which cover everything from their health and safety to fair recruitment and dismissal policies​.

Recent data suggests an increased need for legal services in areas such as regulatory work, mergers & acquisitions, and labor & employment​. The areas of unfair prejudice towards shareholders and breach of contract also appear to be common grounds for business disputes in the UK​.

To navigate these legal issues effectively, businesses can benefit from seeking professional legal advice. This approach can help companies to understand their rights and obligations, make informed decisions, and mitigate the risk of costly legal disputes. It's also worth noting that litigation should not be a knee-jerk reaction, particularly in commercial relationships. Utilising contractual dispute-resolution clauses can help to narrow issues or problems in a way which preserves commercial relationships​.

A direct access barrister can provide benefits for company law matters by providing expert legal advice and representation directly to individuals and businesses, saving time and reducing costs. They also offer a wealth of experience and knowledge in company law, and can provide services from the initial advice stage through to court representation if required.

The use of direct access barristers can be particularly beneficial in complex areas of company law, such as regulatory compliance, contract disputes, and intellectual property issues, where their specialist expertise can be invaluable. They can also provide strategic advice and representation in court, providing a consistent approach throughout the legal process.

Visit myBarrister today to find the best Company Law Direct Access Barrister for your needs.

Barristers are serving their family law clients well and clients who take advantage of direct access develop stronger relationships with their barristers, according to new research commissioned by the Bar Standards Board (BSB).

The BSB published the findings of its research with people who have used barristers’ services during family legal proceedings.

Interviews with respondents who used a barrister highlighted the following:

• Most clients were positive about the service they received from their barrister;
• Although the proportion of those who directly accessed a barrister via the public access scheme was low, the research suggests this led to a stronger barrister/client relationship, clients were more likely to access a greater range of services from their barrister, and all of those who used this approach would use the scheme again; but
• Some clients referred by solicitors highlighted the limited contact they had with their barrister before going to court, and that this led to problems with the service they received, such as the barrister not providing enough information to the client, or the barrister not having all the details they needed to provide effective representation.

A wider survey amongst people with a family law issue, showed that:

• More than half of the respondents said they were not confident about making an informed decision on who to turn to for legal advice at the start of their family law matter;
• Understanding of the role of barristers in the family law process was reasonably good and more than two-thirds (69 per cent) were aware that they can directly access some barristers without the need for a solicitor; and
• Looking ahead, a majority of all respondents said that they would consider using a barrister for legal advice in the future.

BSB Director of Policy and Strategy Ewen MacLeod said: “We are pleased that most of the respondents who used a barrister for a family law matter were satisfied with the level of service that they received. But our survey also shows that many people facing a family law matter are unable to access appropriate legal advice for a variety of reasons. They may choose to represent themselves in court or turn to unregulated advisors for help.” 

Family Law Barrister - myBarrister

Westminster City Council is to impose a “basement tax” on those proposing to develop basements and basement extensions as a condition for receiving planning permission, according to an article in the London Evening Standard.

Residents in Westminster will have to pay an average levy of £8,000 to secure planning permission for excavations under the new rules. The money raised will pay for a dedicated basement enforcement team of 15 officials who will monitor whether construction work complies with restrictions on noise, working hours and number of truck deliveries. 

The move follows a huge surge in the number of planning applications for vast basements, some with facilities such as swimming pools, saunas, gyms and cinema rooms over the past decade. 

Robert Davis, Westminster City Council deputy leader and Cabinet member for the built environment, said: “We are sticking up for local residents, many of whom have found the explosion of basement development in recent years hellish. It is right that those who want to build basements should contribute to this new service, which will work to help mitigate the negative impacts.”

He continued: “Westminster City Council supports the right kind of growth and is not against all basement development, but they must be carried out in a way that is considerate to local residents and the environment.

Residential Planning Barrister - My Barrister

One of the big four auditing firms, PricewaterhouseCoopers, has been fined £2.3 million by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC), the accountancy watchdog, over its auditing of the subprime lender Cattles and its biggest division, Welcome Financial Services, in 2007.

Simon Bradburn, PwC’s then audit engagement partner, was fined £75,600, reduced from £120,000 as part of a settlement.

The penalties come nearly a year after Cattles settled a lawsuit with PwC that alleged the accountants acted negligently in its auditing of the Yorkshire firm during the financial crisis, according to an article in The Guardian.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of creditors to Cattles, which lent to people with poor credit histories and entered into a financial restructuring scheme in 2011.

Gareth Rees QC, executive counsel to the FRC, said: “The substantial fines imposed in this case reflect the seriousness of the audit failings in relation to the critical area of impairment provisioning in a subprime lender and will send a strong signal to the audit community of the importance of upholding high standards of professional conduct in audit work.”

PwC said: “While the FRC has acknowledged that we had been deliberately misled by third parties, we recognise that certain aspects of this 2007 audit fell short of expected standards.”

Professional Negligence Barrister  - myBarrister