Category: General

Posted on by

Closed Premises must take care to maintain the Premises Licence.

As a country we find ourselves in completely uncharted waters. Never has the leisure industry experienced disruption such as that currently caused by COVID-19 and the steps taken by the government to stop the spread of infection.

With huge challenges to cash flow and businesses fighting to stay alive we think it is vitally important for clients to understand what happens to a Premises Licence should the worst happen and insolvency becomes a real possibility. We hope insolvency doesn’t become a reality, but if it does there are things you can do to protect your Premises Licences.

The starting point, from a licensing perspective in terms of insolvency, is section 27 of the Licensing Act 2003, which provides that a Premises Licence lapses if the holder of the licence:

  • dies;
  • becomes a person who lacks capacity within the meaning of the Mental Capacity Act 2005;
  • becomes insolvent;
  • is dissolved;
  • if the premises is a club, ceases to be a recognised club; or
  • ceases to be entitled to work in the UK.

Section 27 goes on to say that a person becomes insolvent on:

  • the approval of a voluntary arrangement; or
  • being made bankrupt; or
  • having his estate sequestered; or
  • entering into a trust deed with his creditors.

Section 27 also sets out the position in respect of companies. Companies become insolvent on:

  • the approval of a voluntary arrangement; or
  • the appointment of an administrator; or
  • the appointment of an administrative receiver; or
  • going into liquidation.

The effect of a Premises Licence lapsing is that there is no Premises Licence to speak of and so any Licensable Activities (sale of alcohol, late night refreshment, and regulated entertainment) cannot be provided on or from the Premises that the Premises Licence pertains to.

If one of the triggers for the lapse of a Premises Licence has occurred or is likely to occur it is important to take action as quickly as possible. This is because of the provisions of Section 50 of the Licensing Act 2003, which can, if not properly actioned, lead to the loss of a Premises Licence for good.

Section 50 applies where a Premises Licence has lapsed because one of the events in section 27 has taken place, or where a Premises Licence has been surrendered in accordance with section 28 of the Licensing Act 2003

The basic position is that you have 28 days from the day the Premises Licence lapses to transfer the Premises Licence and “reinstate” it.

Section 50 provides that anyone who could apply for a Premises Licence under section 16 of the Licensing Act 2003 can apply to transfer of the “lapsed” Premises Licence provided:

  • the application is made no later than 28 days after the day the Premises Licence lapsed; and
  • the request to transfer the Premises Licence is requested with immediate effect.

Those who could apply for a Premises Licence, and who can therefore apply for a transfer include:

  • an individual or individuals jointly
  • a company
  • a partnership
  • an unincorporated association
  • a recognised club
  • a charity
  • the proprietor of an educational establishment
  • a health service body
  • a person registered under Part 2 of the Care Standards Act 2000
  • a person registered under Chapter 2 Part 1 of the Health & Social Care Act 2008 in respect of an independent hospital in England
  • the chief officer of a police force in England

who is carrying on, or proposing to carry on, a business which involves the use of the Premises for Licensable Activities, or who is making an application pursuant to a statutory function.

Provided a transfer application is made in accordance with the provisions of section 42 of the Licensing Act 2003 (the correct form used/fee paid etc.), section 50 goes on to say that the “lapsed” Premises licence is reinstated from the time the application is received by the relevant Licensing Authority.

This means that from the time the application is with the council, Licensable Activities can be provided on or from the premises to which the Premises Licence pertains.

It is important to note that if the application to transfer the Premises is rejected or is withdrawn then the Premises Licence will lapse once more.

Finally, it is hugely important to understand that you only get one go at transferring the Premises Licence to reinstate it. A sting in the tail of Section 50 means that only one transfer application can be made to reinstate the licence and if the application fails or is withdrawn, the Premises Licence is gone for good.

Our experience is that financial turmoil can understandably lead to Premises Licences being overlooked. Our view is that it is important to consider the prospective impact of insolvency on Premises Licences because they are a valuable asset. This particularly applies to Premises Licences with generous hours or few conditions, or those within highly sought after Cumulative Impact Areas.

Our top tips for ensuring that your Premises Licences don’t fall victim to lapse and loss are:

  1. Look at who holds your Premises Licences. Is it an individual, company or some other entity?
  2. Assess the likelihood of that entity becoming insolvent. Use a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being extremely likely and 10 being not likely at all) if that helps.
  3. If it is likely, or there is a chance that the entity will become insolvent, start taking steps to protect your Premises Licences immediately. Don’t wait for insolvency, get ahead of the curve.
  4. Identify a “safe pair of hands” – a person, company or other entity that can become Premises Licence Holder. You really have next to unlimited possibilities in that regard
  5. Draft (or ask us to draft) Consent to Transfer Forms giving permission to transfer the Premises Licences from A to B in readiness for potential applications – there is no harm in being prepared
  6. If the worst has happened and one of the trigger events in section 27 has occurred. Don’t panic. You have 28 days to transfer the Premises Licence to reinstate it
  7. When making a transfer after an insolvency it is not necessary to submit a Consent to Transfer Form however, be aware that Licensing Authority’s may ask to see some evidence of the insolvency in order to process the transfer

At Woods Whur we are here for you through the good times and the bad. If you are concerned about this or any other issues arising out of the current COVID-19 crisis, please do give us a call and we will do what we can to help and advise you.

Posted on by

Our Top 5 Silly Licensing Conditions

Things are really tough out there at the moment and my colleagues at Woods Whur have looked at some of the pressing issues currently being faced.

At times like this it is important that we all pull together and help one another get through, there are lots of examples out there on social media and in the news.

It is also important in periods such as these to remind ourselves of the lighter side of the sector we work in and to try to find some humour where we can.

With that in mind we have put together a list of our top 5 silly licensing conditions.

**Switches on Pick of the Pops Music**

Coming in at number 5 we have No Boogie Wonderland with “there shall be no dedicated dancefloor.”

An odd condition this that really achieves nothing at all. What is a “dedicated dancefloor” when it’s at home? If only this was imposed at Elstree Studios we could get rid of Strictly Come Dancing for good!

That is closely followed at number 4 by “the DPS shall be at the premises at all times the premises are authorised to be open” by Night & Day.

This actually appeared on a 24 hour premises licence in London effectively requiring the imprisonment of the DPS within the venue forever.

At 3 are The Doors with “All doors and windows shall remain closed during regulated entertainment.”

When is a door not a door? When it’s ajar! The oldies really are the best and clearly nobody considered what would happen if a customer needed to make use of a door! And not just any door – ALL THE DOORS!

It was a close run thing for number 1 spot this week and flying in at number 2 is “there shall be no vertical drinking” by Harry and the Horizontal Drinkers.

This condition has always baffled slightly when there are other ways of achieving the same aim; ones that don’t place the power of whether or not a premises licence holder commits a criminal offence squarely in the hand of the customer. Stand up and finish your drink and you might finish off the premises!

And finally pop pickers, our number 1 silly condition is “customers will be local people” by The Yokels, which is the follow up to their previous hit “you’re not from around here are you?”

There’s our top 5. There are many, many, more and we’re always delighted (and secretly disturbed) to hear new examples.

Putting our serious hat back on what all of these aberrations highlight is the need for thought and clarity when drafting licence conditions. The Section 182 guidance (1.16) is very clear on the do’s and don’ts of licence conditions. We would add the following bullet points to 1.16:

  • Shouldn’t be cut & paste from the applicant’s operating schedule;
  • Shouldn’t try to be too clever; and
  • Should beware the law of unintended consequences.

What do we mean by this?

Well, take the example of the “locals” condition above. This has clearly been lifted from section M of an applicant’s application form. It’s not a condition, but rather an aspirational statement.

The condition about doors is a condition that is trying to be too clever, but no thought has been given to how customers are to get into and out of the premises. More importantly the condition doesn’t define which doors so, as silly as this sounds, it could apply to the fridge or the dishwasher in the same way it applies to the entrance to the premises!

Finally, the condition about the DPS being on the premises forever is an example of the law of unintended consequences. It is clear that what the condition wants to achieve, but what it actually achieves is permanent tethering to the premises! And we thought DPS’ had it tough already!

If you need help drafting effective conditions, whether you are an operator or a licensing authority, we are but a phone call away.

And don’t forget, if you have concerns about any conditions on your licence, silly or not, and your ability to comply with them then talk to us. It could be that they are not enforceable, not legal or not relevant to your style of operation. We might be able to remove them, even by a simple minor variation, and modernize your licence.

Posted on by

COVID 19 – Something Not To Forget

I’m sure over the past days and weeks you’ve been bombarded with newsletters, articles and sage words from lots of law firms telling you how to deal with the COVID 19 pandemic from an employer’s viewpoint to your commercial arrangements to name just a couple.

I thought I would take this edition of the newsletter to perhaps raise a cautionary word about regulatory law generally and health & safety law specifically.

You cannot fail to notice that literally every day the law is being relaxed on many fronts to allow a flexible approach to dealing with the issue. Whilst you may be comforted by the steps being taken both locally and nationally, don’t forget that the same standards & duties that you are required to adhere to in “normal times” still apply during these exceptional circumstances.

At the time of writing, your obligations as a duty holder under Health and Safety Legislation haven’t altered. You may perhaps agree that the need to act and do all that is reasonably practicable to keep your employees and others safe has been enhanced rather than diminished in these exceptional times.

It’s important not to forget the standards & duties that should be upheld and in the case of changes due to COVID 19 such as a reduced work force & agile working, should be revisited to ensure they are fit for purpose.

One obvious example is your arrangements in relation to lone and remote working which in the past may not have warranted too much scrutiny or a formalisation of a policy or procedure, but now are a daily activity.

Despite these hectic and uncertain times, take a moment to consider how you operate now as opposed to how you may have operated last week – what has changed, and do your health and safety arrangements need to change to keep pace?

Should anything go wrong and months in the future your regulator is asking you potentially awkward questions, just be aware that saying, ‘it was COVID 19’ may potentially be some mitigation when something has gone wrong, as far as I can see, it will not be a defence.

Please check your procedures reflect the reality of today, and keep them reviewed and change them when necessary.

On behalf of the Regulatory Team we hope you all stay safe & healthy and you know where we are should you need any assistance.

James

Posted on by

What a difference a week makes

Last Friday I had a meeting in Manchester followed by a client lunch where we were pre-occupied with discussing how our businesses were going to cope with the Coronavirus outbreak. None of us realised that a week later, the leisure and gambling industries would be so badly affected or by the pace of change. I didn’t anticipate then that I would have asked all of my staff to start working from home and put us into almost isolation. Technology is a wonderful thing and it is amazing that we can keep our business going through remote access to our systems. This doesn’t come anywhere near to the social interaction that we have through the workplace.

A usual Friday morning in the office, in dress down clothing and with a fantastic breakfast sandwich from Nosh, is one of the best days of the working week.

So much has changed at such speed.

On Monday and Tuesday of this week, all of our outstanding hearings at licensing authorities around the Country were stood down. These were some review hearings and some premises licence applications that had valid representations. In all of those cases we have been told that the likelihood is that these will not be relisted until after May. This is obviously going to put breaks on the development plans of a number of companies. We also have a number of applications which are currently running through their notice periods and if they receive valid representations, it is in doubt a hearing on those particular will be listed.

I did notice last night that Wandsworth Council held a remote hearing where technology was used to get everybody to remotely log into the hearing.

I have had this previously where I was permitted to dial into a summary review interim steps hearing even though I was away on holiday. It just shows that there is the ability and technology to set this up should we enter a prolonged period of isolation. Gary Grant, the Licensing Specialist Barrister from FTB Chambers, wrote an excellent article entitled ‘Licensing hearings during the Coronvirus crisis.’ This article set out the fact that there is an ability for remote hearings to take place. He highlights that there is no legal bar to holding a Licensing Sub-Committee using remote technology. This will be practically very difficult, albeit legally possible, in that most authority areas have started to send their staff home to work remotely as well. This is to continue and the likelihood is that applications will be adjourned rather than more remote hearings.

There are clearly significant operational issues that come about whilst premises are still open. It is critical that the licensing objectives are promoted by operators who choose to stay open and conditions on premises licences will need to be complied with. If anyone has any confusion of where we are on this then please contact us directly by mobile number or email.

In addition, the Business Crime Hub from the Metropolitan Police Service have sent out a very helpful note in relation to their position moving through unprecedented times.

Our colleagues in Scotland have been grappling with the issues as well and Glasgow City Council have sent out a very clear “advice and guidance for current licence holders and new applicants on changes to our licensing service.” This is to last for the period of Covid-19 outbreak.

This highlights that there are to be no face to face appointments. All planned meetings with the licensing and regulatory committee and the City of Glasgow Licensing Board have been postponed.

In addition, they are asking that only the most essential applications are submitted and if they are submitted, they should be sent by electronic means rather than paper work.

Glasgow have moved very quickly to set out a very clear guidance document which can be found at the following link – http://www.sllp.co.uk/TWLinks/C19.pdf.  We understand that most other Scottish Licensing Boards are offering similar advice to clients.

The Gambling Commission is sending out regular notifications as to their expectations during these testing times.

In the most recent email sent yesterday, the Commission highlighted that they are following Public Health England’s Guidance and have told all staff to work from home until further notice. They have set out that the Commission has set out a well-practiced and comprehensive business continuity plan that they have invoked with the intention of minimising the impact on their regulatory and advice services.

The Gambling Commission have highlighted that whilst these current circumstances create unprecedented changes to daily life, that these changes will also increase the risks to some individuals which mean that despite the fact that these are changing times, customers must be protected by operators.

They set out “first and foremost we expect all our licensees to follow the applicable Public Health guidance, which I am confident you will already be doing. Where facilities for Gambling are being offered, we expect all our licensees to ensure that they have sufficient management, staffing and an oversight in place to maintain compliance with the LCCP that apply to their licences.

The social distancing measures that are being put in place will mean that more people will be at home and we would like to remind online operators that they must continue to act responsibly, especially in regard to individual customer affordability and increase social responsibility interactions.” – Neil McArthur. This is a clear message that the Gambling Commission expects licensed operators to be increasing their social responsibility principles during this period. In addition, the Gambling Commission have written to us directly to ask that we do not send any documents by post. All documents to be received are expected to be scanned and sent electronically.

They are currently deciding how to proceed with personal licences, usually they require an original identification to be provided but are going to be determining how to deal with this during the currency of the outbreak.

It is clear that the Gambling Commission is seeking to provide a service as close to normal working life as possible.

The taxi licensing sector is going to be seriously affected through the Covid-19 outbreak.

The Government guidance is that no driver should be working if they have a new continuous cough and/or high fever and should obviously at that point self-isolate.

Drivers of Hackney Carriage or private hire vehicles, Hackney Carriage and private hire proprietors and private hire operators have responsibilities under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 to both themselves and those who are likely to come into contact with their business.

We would hope to see that taxi licensees are frequently cleaning and disinfecting objects and surfaces that are touched regularly.

They will have been reminded of the following document – http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001ORzch4VgR_8_4jtHWPrUhWWXUFEwPk1_yOx0G_BvwCVE3JgV7KFDkHPQLVdB6-mnHKtXBIf9D1jSjJ734LV2TMR1XtsIMLvnHr9xulnjGD30DGLmenz_JiAMNHnev78MjVN8LtMIFJ0dgvo3_cwki5eaFxCXB7J0IRcX4z7jb90l5Q_bpeiomNoX5NFdfxuU2zTS8JXMfav1GTWBRLaxHyArFqnXeanjwAiOWwOeItGPSPaEYk044ST_yHdsvMDrCGNbEvLJz_2Dn14ayhV5vPYxQ46JOAmwQOE0Y7l0K5Wj6JEQsl3AMNcnumKAjhM4EXaLUrIFGzUSIs-e3jhnTfqOTjxvuvOUcxOMbI8jQJI=&c=8o17pjsQEdLRrknxnpRasOps3Ta5IG1AoK62O9nwvRAR5wEMVqqstw==&ch=BlkNCzs5PWMCwu2JegPktSao_dEXzv_JXLr8B99FSikLegMQ4yKqRQ.

We are certain that taxi’s will continue to play a vital role in the movement of people through these difficult times.

It is now becoming clear that we are going to be in a protracted period of different working practices. We hope that everyone will look to make the licensing process and regulatory remit as user-friendly as possible during this period. I have had a significant number of messages from operators asking how our team is and the element of interaction has been high. This is at a time when their own businesses are closing for public safety reasons.

Having being in the leisure sector for over 30 years, I can attest to the fact that they are a resilient bunch. It’s now imperative that the Government give significant financial support so that these businesses, viable until the outbreak of the Coronavirus, have the ability to come through the other side and provide the much needed distractions that we will all be looking forward to by then. The measures so far announced don’t go far enough and it is hoped that the Councillor will be making more practical announcements later today which can come into effect very quickly. A significant number of my clients have been posting that they are now closing voluntarily until we are through the worse of the virus. These are fabulous responsible operators, viable businesses, who deserve to be supported by central Government.

Paddy

Posted on by

CORONAVIRUS AND WOODS WHUR

These are unprecedented times. Andy and I have worked in the leisure sector for over 30 years and it is hard to watch what is happening.

We have acted for some of our clients for nearly the whole of that period and they have become more than clients, they have become very close friends.

We are hopeful that the Government will announce packages today which will give the leisure sector the support to get through the next few months. Many successful businesses will be pushed to the very limit.

I have just asked our staff to work from home from tonight, something I never thought we would have to do.

We will maintain a skeleton presence in the office but we have invested in a fabulous practice management system, skype and digital dictation which means all of our team can work safely at home.

Importantly we will continue the same level of service which we always strive for…..as the Legal 500 said….”the client always comes first.”

Please stay safe, and do not hesitate to contact us if there is anything we can help with.

Posted on by

Is a Review of the Gambling Act 2005 likely?

The Gambling Act 2005, which came into force on 1 September 2007, made significant changes to the legislation which governs betting and gaming in the UK.  It is easy to forget that were it not for a last minute deal relating to certain parts of that legislation,  Tessa Jowell would not have been able to get the proposed changes through Parliament. There is no doubt that the changes introduced by the Gambling Act 2005 have had a major impact on gambling in the UK but even though it is only 15 years old it is now being argued that it is already out of date.

The view of most experts following the introduction of the Act in 2007 , was that most political parties would be likely to leave the legislation untouched, principally because there was no real political benefit to any of the parties trying to implement any changes.  It was felt that there would be criticism either from the anti-gambling bodies or from the gambling industry  no matter what changes were made.

The 2019 election appears to have changed all of that.  The Conservatives pledged in their manifesto to conduct a review of the 2005 Gambling Act and this followed similar commitments from the Liberal Democrat and the Labour Party. The Conservative Party promised to “make the UK the safest place in the world to be online”.  The general view appears to be that the Gambling Act 2005 is no longer fit for purpose and that the innovations brought in by the industry during the last 15 years  have far outstripped the ability of the Gambling Act 2005 to be an effective piece of legislation. There were particular concerns expressed with regard to problem gamblers not being protected by the Industry, credit card use, loot boxes and a general lack of social responsibility on behalf of the industry.

There have already been some minor changes introduced as credit card gambling is not permitted from the 14th April 2020 other than by non-remote lottery players and the Gambling Commission are undergoing further consultations as this article is being published. Concerns over gambling addiction and the lack of protection for gambling addicts, coupled with an increasing concern about “affordability of gambling” has already been well documented in the press during the last two years.

The Gambling Commission itself has significantly increased the amount of regulatory inspections it carries out and the amount of regulatory cases which are being brought against operators, principally for not complying with anti-money laundering legislation or social responsibility guidelines.  You only have to look at the Gambling Commission website to see the extent of the recent cases and the financial penalties which have been imposed.  Whilst on the one hand the industry argues that AML and SR policies and procedures are constantly evolving to meet the needs of society and the challenges set by the Gambling Commission, it does appear that the Gambling Commission is wholly dissatisfied with the AML and SR policies and procedures operated by the industry in general.

It seems to me that we are quite clearly at the stage now where there is the political will to make changes to the legislation, and that whilst it might not be the most pressing piece of legislation that the Government deals with in 2020 and whilst we may not see the widespread changes that many would like to see, it is clear that there will be a thorough review and changes to the Gambling Act 2005 sometime in the near future.

Those changes will include:

  • A potential ban of certain advertising by gambling companies and new restrictions placed on advertising.  Whether this extends to football clubs and advertising at football grounds is a debateable point.  The Premier League has already stated that it will oppose any blanket ban on gambling advertising, either on shirts or at the grounds, and yet there is growing lobby of those who would like to see this.
  • Increased social responsibility and affordability guidelines and regulations. This may change the overall principle from:

(1) “Does this customer have a gambling problem in any form / are we okay to allow this customer to gamble”; to

(2) “Does this customer have a gambling addition, are we okay to allow this customer to play, can this customer afford to play, how will the customer spend impact on the customer’s finances and how will this impact on other family members etc.”

  • AML and KYC checks will be tightened. The extent of due diligence information which casinos and online operators in particular need to have on those customer who play to a certain limit is already well detailed, but it is likely to see this source of information (enhanced due diligence) extended further.
  • Gambling to be seen as a public health issue, which brings into question, the role of any public health body during the course of any consultation/review.
  • A potential levy from problem gambling funding with gambling addiction being treated in the same way as drug and alcohol addiction.
  • An increase in regulations governing on line gambling
  • Source of funding and source of wealth and the information required in respect of both of these will also be extended.

All of the above is on the back of increased scrutiny by the Gambling Commission, the limit on fixed odd betting terminals being reduced to £2 and the credit card ban on all gambling with the exception of non-remote lotteries.

The majority of national operators have already been through the process of a regulatory review and in some cases, on more one occasion and in many cases, leading to significant financial penalty.  It has just been reported at the start of the February that the Commission has handed out large fines to seven bookmakers for allowing under 18s to place bets on a course and a further reviews with other operators are likely in 2020.

All of the above is of course dependent on the Government have sufficient time in Parliament to implement new legislation.  Gambling Commission guidelines and regulations can be changed without primary legislation so there will be a tightening of controls over gambling operators, irrespective of any decision to change primary legislation and it is absolutely essential that operators keep up to date with any changes to these guidelines and regulations during what will be a challenging time for operators.

Posted on by

Gambling Commission partner with Twitter to issue Guidance on how to regulate content

The Gambling Commission has partnered with Twitter to create guidance aimed at supporting users who want to limit the amount of gambling-related content they see on the social media platform. The guidance explains the different ways in which Twitter’s safety tools and settings can be adjusted within an individual account, to help mitigate the risk of exposure to gambling-related messaging and advertisements. This year the Gambling Commission is also looking to produce similar guidance for users of other social media platforms. Twitter is the first to work with the Gambling Commission on this initiative.

In the guidance you are shown how you can control on various levels:

  • Manage ‘interests’ within a profile; interests are comprised of a list of keywords, associated to an individual’s Twitter activity.
  • Turn off notifications; this prevents the user from receiving notifications from certain types of accounts they’d like to avoid (such as a sports account).
  • Use the mute feature; this enables a user to have greater control over what they can and can’t see on Twitter by ensuring certain words, accounts and conversations are no longer visible.

In October 2019 the Commission’s chief executive Neil McArthur raised his concerns to the gambling industry around the exposure of gambling adverts to children, young people and vulnerable adults. He has encouraged gambling businesses to embrace advertising technology and be more socially responsible.

“This level of exposure is a concern and I have challenged the industry to quickly accelerate opportunities to reduce the amount of advertising seen by young people, children and vulnerable adults across all digital platforms. Whilst we work on a plan which sets out new standards for how the industry will embrace advertising technology, I hope that this guidance will play a role in helping consumers to limit the gambling-related content they see on Twitter.”

Katy Minshall, Head of UK Public Policy at Twitter, said: “Improving the health of the public conversation is our overall mission as is ensuring those on the service feel safe and supported. With that in mind, we’re continuing to enforce our policies, specifically around prohibited and restricted ad content as well as assessing the eligibility of ads on our service – these policies apply to all advertisers and advertisements on Twitter.”

This is another example of how the Commission is upping the ante with regards to advertisements/publishing of gambling specific offers and exposure to gambling on social media.

Click on the following link to download the guidance document  https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/PDF/Twitter-consumer-guide.pdf

Posted on by

Business as Usual?

Our departure from the EU slipped by at 11pm last Friday without any noticeable change to our daily lives!

In fact, a number of government organisations were very quick to tell me by email on Saturday morning that definitely nothing had changed in terms of regulatory compliance!

The Health and Safety Executive, Environment Agency and a clutch of other government departments/agencies have been busy telling me this and I’m sure any hopes and dreams of us leaving behind any dreaded EU directives and regulations are a little premature!

The duties that you have to discharge from a regulatory view point created by EU directives & regulations are still unaltered and are still requiring your attention and compliance.

Of course, over this year we will see the fruit or not of the government’s negotiations with the EU and the position may change.

That said, I would be prepared that the status quo will remain and where EU law has been adopted into domestic legislation –  don’t expect a bonfire of EU legislation.

Where I see a divergence from EU legislation will be achieved a little more subtly and over a longer period of time. We now have the possible advantage to choose what pieces of EU legislation from a regulatory view point are appropriate and potentially adopt them into UK legislation or discard them and adopt our solutions to particular regulatory issues.

For me, this is a welcome potential development. The ability for us to choose legislation which is relevant in particular to the situation prevailing at the time in the UK, rather than trying to adopt EU legislation which may be particularly specific and easy to comply with in some countries in the EU, but not necessarily the UK.

I am currently concluding a lengthy and time consuming case for a client who has been objecting to complying with some environmental legislation adopted from Europe, which is wholly inappropriate in the context of the client’s operations in the UK.

In an ideal future, I would like to think that Parliament would have created legislation which is tailored to our needs in the UK and prevent the costs and wasted time in trying to adopt legislation designed to generically apply to all the member states rather than specifically to one.

Unfortunately, only time will tell if we ultimately end up with regulatory systems which do this – fingers crossed that we do!

Posted on by

Julian Skeens joins Woods Whur as a consultant

We have long admired Julian and been great friends on the circuit, so we were delighted that he wanted to join us and further assist our expansion in the London and South. After Luke Elford, who Julian worked with previously, joined us last year this further strengthens our London focus.

Julian has over 30 years’ experience in delivering licensing successes across the UK and advises a broad range of prestigious clients, including pubs, restaurants, nightclubs, galleries, theatres, and hotels.
For the past 32 years Julian has been consistently recognised by his peers as an expert in the field of licensing in Chambers and Partners UK and Legal 500 UK. He is known by his competitors as a “creative thinker” and a “formidable opponent” he leaves no stone unturned in his relentless pursuit of his clients’ interests.

“I am delighted to be joining Woods Whur. I believe that their commercially focused and pragmatic advice fits closely with my own personal approach and allows me the opportunity to provide the competitive advantages I like to offer clients. Paddy and Andy are at the top of the tree right now so it is exciting to be involved with their practice. It is also particularly pleasing for me to work with Luke again, he is already a great  lawyer, but also a personal friend. This gives us the right environment to further grow the firm’s enviable representation in the vibrant London market.”

“We are all pleased that Julian has joined us. Andy and I have known Julian for the whole of our professional careers and respected his advocacy skills, client list and desire to take on even the most difficult of cases. Andy and I were already undertaking some fabulous work in the South and London in particular, and Julian joining us to link in with Luke really sets the agenda for exciting growth.”

Posted on by

Stress in the workplace – Criteria released for work-related stress investigations

At the regulatory seminar back in September (where does the time go!) we discussed stress in the workplace and the potential impacts and difficulties companies faced in monitoring a non-tangible health and safety issue.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) have now released guidance on how it, as a regulator, investigates stress where there is evidence of a wider organisational failing but does not investigate concerns relating to individual cases of bullying or harassment.

The guidance issued indicates that organisations are taking mental wellbeing seriously and it is reassuring that they recognise mental wellbeing as an important factor in employee’s health in accordance with the law and their duties as an employer

Stress is not reportable under RIDDOR as a notifiable incident/concern. Only where key wider failings are identified is when stress in the workplace becomes relevant for the HSE to perhaps investigate, intervene, and take action.

This comes at a time where a recent survey has indicated that 6 in 10 construction workers suffer work-related mental ill health. The recent health and safety statistics also show a breakdown of work related stress, depression, anxiety figures which explain why the HSE are releasing further guidance on the topic for employers.

In any event, having a system in place which identifies how employees may experience stress, either through their employment or otherwise, whilst in the workplace is important for organisations to deal with not only issues with bullying and harassment for equality reasons, but the wider health and safety remit.

We have now seen the introduction of mental health first aiders within many different sectors to provide a point of contact not only for physical health, but also for mental health. This is one of many introductions that companies may wish to consider.

The issue here is how to actually quantify the problem and then deal with it. It is certainly difficult to devise a system that works for all employees therefore experience has shown behand a general policy for addressing stress – there must be a flexible approach by HR, line managers etc. to implement the policy in specific ways to the individual employee. That individual approach needs to be documented and that individual ‘plans’ need to be considered also as a whole to identify trends and particular organisation wide issues – so they can be addressed.

This approach is useful not only not only in the area or health and safety compliance, but also provides good evidence if you face a personal injury claim from employees for stress!