Employer's liability meaning

When does a section 75 debt arise? An s 75 liability crystallises in respect of an occupational pension scheme that is underfunded on a buy-out basis and: an employment-cessation event happens for a relevant participating employer within a multi-employer scheme an insolvency event occurs in relation to a participating employer of the scheme, or the scheme formally goes into winding up In a multi-employer scheme, an employer’s s 75 debt is its allocated share of the scheme deficit, appropriately assessed on a buy-out basis. As an alternative to immediately paying the s 75 debt in full, an employer may enter into a deferred debt arrangement, an apportionment arrangement, or a withdrawal arrangement. Section 75 does not apply at all to money purchase schemes, unregistered pension schemes, unfunded public sector schemes, and a scheme with only one member. ...

This checklist outlines the principal points an employer should assess, and the provisions it ought to require, to achieve a clear and binding letter of intent (LOI) on a construction project. Although the terms ‘contractor’ and ‘employer’ are used, the same approach applies to arrangements between a contractor and a sub-contractor. When drafting and negotiating an LOI, not every matter listed will be relevant; each should be considered in light of the specific circumstances. See Practice Note: Letters of intent—construction for further detail on letters of intent and, for an example of client guidance, see Precedent: Advice to clients—use of letters of intent. Key issues and clauses Parties’ particulars: Check that the employer’s and contractor’s full details are set out at the start of the LOI (including exact company names and, where appropriate, the company number) to prevent any doubt about the identity of the contracting parties. If either is within a corporate group, ensure the correct group company is named as the contracting entity... ...

A letter of intent (LOI) can be put in place before the formal agreement and signing of a building contract (or sub‑contract) so that certain design tasks and/or works may commence at an early stage as necessary and appropriate. This Checklist outlines the principal points a contractor should weigh and the drafting it ought to seek, or ask to be inserted, to secure a clear, binding letter of intent on a construction project. Although the terms ‘contractor’ and ‘employer’ are used, the same principles also apply to dealings between a contractor and a sub‑contractor. When negotiating or preparing a letter of intent, not every point listed below will be pertinent; users must assess each matter against the particular circumstances. See Practice Note: Letters of intent—construction for further guidance on letters of intent. Key issues and clauses Are the parties’ particulars fully and accurately recorded? Make sure the employer’s and contractor’s full details are set out at the start of the letter of intent (including full company...

Anderson v CAE Crewing Services Ltd [2024] EAT 78 On 22 May 2024, the EAT issued a judgment holding that the lower tribunal had wrongly concluded CAE Crewing Services bore no liability for the actions of two doctors who examined flight attendant Jessica Anderson for a fit-to-fly certificate. Judge James Tayler found the Employment Tribunal had misapplied the law by framing the question as whether the doctors conducting the fitness-to-fly examinations were agents of the employer. Having reached a non-liability finding, the tribunal then gave reasoning on Anderson’s substantive disability discrimination claims that was incomplete and inadequate, he said. The judgment records that in January 2019 Anderson entered into a contract with CAE Crewing Services, a business that supplies airlines with cabin crew. Members are expected to hold fit-to-fly certificates issued by aviation medical examiners. An examiner assessed Anderson in December 2018; she also has a heart condition...

Treadwell v Barton Turns Development Ltd [2024] EAT 137 What are the practical implications of this decision? The practical effect is that uncertainty endures as to whether a claimant can contend both that a co-worker imposed the detriment of dismissal and that the employer bears vicarious responsibility for that misconduct, even though the employer could not itself be personally liable for the detriment of dismissal. Pursuing such a formulation assists the claimant owing to the approach to causation, and because compensation for injury to feelings is available on a detriment claim but not for an unfair dismissal claim issued directly against the employer. In this appeal, HHJ Barklem indicates adherence to the unambiguous language of paragraph 91 in Osipov, which points to vicarious liability being capable of arising in these circumstances. That conclusion directly clashes with Bourne J’s judgment in Wicked Vision, which reached the reverse view on the footing that paragraph 91 did not form part of Osipov’s ratio. The consequence is a continuing lack of clarity pending...

In this issue: Budgets and Finance Bills VAT Taxes management and litigation Individuals and income tax International Employment taxes Real estate tax LexTalk®Tax: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary Trackers New and updated content Useful information Budgets and Finance Bills Finance Bill 2026 completes House of Commons committee stage On 3 February 2026, the Public Bill Committee concluded scrutiny of Finance Bill 2026 after just six of the scheduled 14 sittings. The Bill has been reissued to fold in government amendments cleared in committee, bringing the Commons committee phase to a close. The revised Bill will proceed to report stage in the Commons—date to follow—which is Parliament’s last chance to make substantive changes. The Commons recess runs from 13 to 20 February, with business resuming on 23 February. See: LNB News 04/02/2026 19 and Tax—Finance Bill 2026 tracker—progress through Parliament. National Insurance Contributions...

Quick view This Practice Note explores whether an employee can be engaged by two or more employers for the same role at the same time—joint employment (also termed dual employment or multiple employment). It examines the general assumption, the issue of vicarious liability, and the position of agency workers, office-holders and teachers. It also considers the setting of collective bargaining, the effect of TUPE 2006, and tax questions that may arise. Finally, it reviews the factors relevant to written contracts that involve multiple employers. Joint employment is typically discussed in relation to vicarious liability, for instance negligence (see: Vicarious liability, below). Regarding an individual’s employment rights, it appears reasonably clear that the prevailing presumption—that an employee cannot have more than one employer for the same work at the same time—can be displaced in these situations: where the person has two roles with separate employers and the roles are compatible; and where two or more employers act together within a partnership or joint venture ...

This Practice Note considers statutory adoption pay (SAP) and contractual adoption payments. It also examines eligibility criteria, the meaning of employed earner, the duration of entitlement, notice obligations, the evidence required, the length of time SAP is payable, rates of pay, and liability, including where an individual has more than one employer. It addresses outcomes where a child dies or a placement breaks down, circumstances in which SAP is not due, record-keeping duties, and how recoupment operates. Finally, it explores how contractual sick pay interacts with SAP, adoptions from outside the UK, and contracting out. A parent taking adoption leave (see Practice Note: Adoption leave) may qualify for SAP for part of that leave. They may receive payment for time off to attend adoption appointments (see Practice Note: Time off work for adoption appointments). Where a child is placed for adoption, the adopter and a second person—who must be the adopter’s spouse, civil partner, or partner—may, if they choose, share up to 37 of the 39 weeks of pay...

PI & Clinical negligence horizon scanner—July 2025 [Archived] ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is not maintained. It summarises the principal legal developments relevant to personal injury and clinical negligence practitioners as at July 2025. For developments predating this horizon scanner, see PI and Clinical Negligence horizon scanning and key cases—overview. Key PI and clinical negligence developments The personal injury discount rate—a review In late 2024, the Lord Chancellor, Shabana Mahmood MP, revealed the outcome of her five‑month review of the discount rate, initiated in July 2024. One month after the new +0.5% discount rate took effect, Thea Wilson (barrister at 12 King’s Bench Walk) assesses its impact on cases, the responses from claimant and defendant representatives, and the consequences of the change for legal practitioners. See News Analysis: The personal injury discount rate—a review. MoJ announces reduction in CFO’s interest rates The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has announced lower interest rates for the Courts Funds Office’s (CFO) special and basic accounts...

The Contract comprises the completed Standard Building Contract Without Quantities for use in Scotland 2016 published by the SBCC subject to the following amendments: Recitals and Articles updated: contractor to provide a master programme and Schedule of Information Requirements; CDP responsibility accepted; Principal Contractor duties priced; arbitration deleted; Schedule of Amendments prevails; Third Party Agreements duties. Contract Particulars: arbitration entries removed; Rectification Period set at 12 months; fluctuations and certain PII/guarantee entries deleted. Conditions: key definitions revised (Practical Completion, Copyright Material, Design sub‑contractors, Funder, Site); Scottish jurisdiction; approvals mean principles only; entire agreement; variations in writing. Design/materials/programming: contractor accepts ER/CP; quality and non‑deleterious materials; programme reporting; site risk; drawings/info supply; tighter discrepancy notices. Time/defects: mitigate and advise on delay; narrower Relevant Events; Practical Completion clarified; stronger rectification, consequential damage and indemnity; phased as‑built/occupation information. IP/confidentiality/BIM: broader licence, moral rights waivers and delivery; confidentiality reinforced; BIM where adopted. Management/sub‑contracting: access, approved Site Manager, meetings; prescribed sub‑contracts; collateral warranties/third‑party rights; CDM duties; insurance...

The Contract comprises the completed Standard Building Contract With Approximate Quantities 2016 published by the JCT subject to the following amendments: This Contract adopts JCT SBC/AQ 2016 with extensive modifications to reflect design responsibility, building safety and commercial controls. Recitals: Contractor to provide a master programme and Schedule of Information Requirements; confirms site due diligence and accepts full CDP design liability. Articles: Dutyholder Regulations added; Tender Price covers Principal Contractor duties; arbitration removed; Schedule of Amendments prevails; strict protection of Third Party Agreements. Definitions/governance: new and revised terms (Building Safety Regulator, HRB, Practical Completion, Copyright Material, Design Sub‑contractors, Dutyholder Regulations); several deletions; English court jurisdiction. Design/materials/information: skill‑and‑care design and coordination; only new, compliant, non‑deleterious materials; golden thread storage; monthly programme reporting; site risks at Contractor’s risk. Procedures/controls: tighter instruction, testing, defects and as‑built duties; enhanced confidentiality and IP licences; HRB assistance; CDM/Dutyholder competency confirmations. Sub‑contracting/rights: prescribed sub‑contracts, insurances and delivery of collateral warranties/third‑party rights; limits on assignment. Payment/commercial: 28‑day final...

This Deed is entered into on the [ insert day ] day of [ insert month ] 20[ insert year ] Parties [ Insert full company name ], incorporated in England and Wales with company number [ insert number ], and whose registered office is at [ insert registered company address ] (the Departing Employer); [ Insert full company name ], incorporated in England and Wales with company number [ insert number ], and whose registered office is at [ insert registered company address ] (the Receiving Employer); and [ [ Insert full name of company ] incorporated in England and Wales with company number [ insert number ] and having its registered office at [ insert registered company address ] OR [ insert individual name(s) ] of [ insert individual address(es) ] ] (the Trustees). Background: (A) [ insert full name of scheme ] (the Scheme) was constituted by an [ interim OR definitive ] deed dated [ insert...

Retention Retention describes the portion of interim payments the employer withholds as security for the contractor’s future performance of its duties and to encourage the contractor to discharge those duties in full and properly. For further details, consult the Practice Note: Retention of payment in construction contracts. When retention is to be released to the contractor depends on the particular contract terms for the project. Typically, half of the retained sum is paid out at practical completion, with the balance thereafter following completion of any remedial works for defects reported within the defects liability period. Consequently, if these milestones are reached before the final certificate is issued, the contractor may have a right to seek payment of some or all of the retention...

In ordinary circumstances, the employer determines the range of disciplinary sanctions, together with the rules on how, and in which situations, they should be used, and records these within its disciplinary policy. For initial misconduct where instant dismissal would not be fitting, a tiered approach to warnings is commonly adopted, aligned with the disciplinary framework set out in the Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures (the Acas Code). The terms of the Acas Code ought to be reviewed with care when managing disciplinary matters at work. Although a departure from the Acas Code will not, by itself, create liability, a tribunal can take such non‑compliance into consideration when assessing appropriate cases. It may, therefore, influence how relevant matters are decided accordingly...