23 November 2010

Spread Christmas cheer but avoid costly claims

The problem of compensation claims arising out of office Christmas parties are now legendary and yet employers continue to get caught out every year. Laura Forster looks at how to ensure everyone has a good time without landing the firm in trouble.

In spite of the recession - maybe even because of it - many companies are pressing ahead with their Christmas Party as usual this year.

Hopefully most parties will pass without any incidents but some could lead to expensive claims so it is sensible for employers to take a few precautions.

Discrimination and harassment claims arising out of unwanted remarks are an obvious risk. With the alcohol flowing at an office party it only takes one member of staff to go too far and there could be a problem. To make matters worse, the offensive remarks don't even have to be made at the official company function. Something said at the pre-party drinks in the local pub could also land the employer in trouble as discrimination laws could still apply.

The answer is for firms to make sure their anti-discrimination policies are up to date and that every employee knows about them. Getting staff to read and sign such documents would also help when defending any future tribunal hearing.

Providing food, soft drinks and keeping a limit on the free bar will also show that a firm is adopting a responsible approach.

Remember also that third party harassment could now be an issues. For example, you could be held responsible if your employees are pestered by clients or suppliers that you invite to the party. This could be made worse if incidents have happened in the past and your firm hasn't done enough to deal with them.

Transport is another issue that still catches people out. You have a duty of care to your employees and sometimes you even have to save them from themselves. This involves such things as trying to prevent them driving home after they've drunk too much. You obviously can't order people not to drive but you need to show you acted responsibly. Handing out phone numbers of taxi firms or ending the party while public transport is still running would help your position enormously if a case ever ended up in court or tribunal.

The much maligned health and safety laws also need to be taken into account. A little forethought can prevent a lot of problems. For example, don't ask staff to put up Christmas decorations and then leave them to spin precariously on office swivel chairs. Make sure that decorations don't cover emergency exit signs and are not placed too close to heat sources.

It's hard for the boss to win at this time of the year. If they don't throw a party they can be branded a scrooge. If they do then they run the risk of getting into trouble if things get put of hand.

Each year the law seems to get a little more complicated and the employer's duty of care seems to increase with it/ It's essential to be pro-active and get the right policies in place. Otherwise the Christmas party could produce a painful, expensive hangover.

For more information please contact Laura Forster on 0115 947 0641 or email lforster@andersonssolicitors.co.uk.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,



15 November 2010

Ruling could help businesses but hurt landlords

Businesses that lease offices in converted houses may now be able to buy the freehold at reduced rates following a court ruling. Peter Sutherland explains how the decision could be bad news for landlords but an unexpected gift for their tenants.

The simple question of "what is a house?" could be worth millions of pounds to Nottinghamshire landlords and their commercial tenants.

It's important because the law allows tenants in blocks of flats to get together and exercise their right to collective enforcement. This is a legal mechanism that allows them to buy the freehold of their homes on favourable terms as long as there is a majority in favour.

It usually applies to private tenants but recently three small businesses who leased offices in converted town houses argued that it should apply to them as well. They knew that if they succeeded they would be able to buy at prices way below the going rate on the open market.

The tenants argued that the buildings they occupied were still essentially houses and sought to exercise their right to collective enfranchisement under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967.

The landlords objected saying the Act did not apply in this case because the buildings were used exclusively for business purposes.

The case went all the way to the Court of Appeal which has ruled in favour of the tenants. Lord Neuberger said the definition of house could "extend to buildings exclusively used for business purposes".

He said: "Once could, it seems to me, quite naturally describe a building built as a town house, which had subsequently been internally converted into offices, as a 'house used as offices': hence it would 'reasonably be called' a house, even though it was not used for residential purposes."

The ruling could lead to several enfranchisement claims from commercial tenants who will see it as an opportunity to buy the freehold of their offices on favourable terms.

Nottingham could be among areas most affected as it contains so many offices situated in properties originally built as houses.

For more information please contact Peter Sutherland on 0115 988 6714 or email psutherland@andersonssolicitors.co.uk

Labels: , , , , , ,