Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
When issuing a notice of termination of employment the general rule is that a clear and unambiguous notice is to be taken at face value and an employer has no right to withdraw it. However, there are certain situations (e.g. where notice is given in the heat of the moment) where this does not apply. These are known as the “special circumstances” exceptions.
What about when an employer intends to terminate the employment but on the basis of a misunderstanding? The Court of Appeal has held in CF Capital v Willoughby that an employer’s mistake in issuing notice of termination before agreement with the employee had been reached was not a special circumstance. The employer had intended to terminate her contract therefore it could not be unilaterally withdrawn.
If there is any scope for misunderstanding in a dismissal scenario employers are advised to send a note of the proposal and seek agreement from the employee before issuing the notice of termination.
Break rights have proved a fertile source of litigation over the last few years. More often than not, tenants have found themselves on the wrong end of the decisions. However, a Court of Appeal decision yesterday has bucked that trend.
View blog
One of the requirements for tenants to contract out of the security of tenure regime contained in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is that they make a simple or statutory declaration before entering into the lease.
Landlords should reconsider summary judgment if a Part 26A restructuring plan is pending.
A landlord’s claim for summary judgment to recover rent and service charge arrears accrued since the start of the pandemic against a non-essential retailer succeeded. Like London buses, a second such case has followed hot on its heels.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up