Category: Latest News

In today’s fast-paced world, the legal landscape is growing alongside advancements in technology and changing client preferences. When facing legal matters, one of the most important decisions clients need to make is who to seek guidance from, whether it’s with an online solicitor or a local solicitor. Both options come with their own set of benefits and limitations, influencing how legal services are obtained and provided in today’s contemporary society.

Today, we explore into the dynamic comparisons between the two. Whether this is your first legal journey or you’re considering new legal representation, understanding the two approaches can allow you to make an informed decision.

Here, we navigate the complexities of choosing your legal ally, comparing the accessibility of online solicitors with the personalised expertise of local solicitors.

When weighing the pros and cons of online versus local solicitors, it is clear that both offer unique experiences. Ultimately, the choice depends on the nature of the legal matter, your personal preferences, and the level of personal interaction and expertise desired.

If you need any assistance with a quote or query, don’t hesitate to contact Aston Bond on 01753 486 777!

In a world dominated by constant connectivity and technology, the lines between work and personal life have blurred. This is especially due to the rise of remote work as a result of the pandemic.

Many workers found themselves at home, answering emails and scheduling work calls many hours after their normal working day had ended.  This caused employees to have less time to unwind and de-stress, ultimately leading to less sleep.

This ever-growing phenomenon has led the Labour party to consider “The Right to Disconnect”, a proposal that allows employees to detach from work outside of their regular contracted hours.

This would mean that once an employee has finished their shift or regular working hours, they should not receive or respond to any calls, emails, or messages that are work-related.  The proposed Bill would actively restrict employers from contacting employees outside of their contracted hours.

At this stage there are no details given so it is unclear whether this will be a strict rule or whether certain exceptions would be in-built into the legislation.  Employers are hopeful that there will be sensible rules allowing contact if there is a real need, especially for senior employees who might need to be available outside of working hours.

The Labour Party has however emphasised the pressing need to define the boundary between personal time and work in our digitally overwhelmed age.

Moving forward, maintaining a balance that respects both professional responsibilities and personal boundaries will be key to encouraging a healthier and sustainable workplace culture.  

Are you ready to delve into the world of Estate Planning? Here, at Aston Bond, we’re passionate about making sure that you and your loved one’s futures are secured. Estate planning may sound intimidating, but we’re here to simplify it into simple language and bite-sized chunks. From clever Will drafting, to efficient ways of reducing inheritance tax, we’ve got you covered. Whether you are completely new to estate planning and only just starting to consider it, or whether you are wanting to adjust existing plans, read on so that we can navigate this process together.

What is estate planning?

Estate Planning is the process of arranging how your assets will pass on your death. Your assets can be anything you own, such as property, vehicles, money, shares, or even personal property, such as jewellery. It allows you to decide where and who everything will pass to, including ensuring that your loved ones are taken care of financially in the future.

What is the process of estate planning?

1. The first step of estate planning involves creating an inventory of all your assets, including its value. You can do this by simply writing a list of everything you own, taking extra care to include more obscure assets like digital assets, cryptocurrencies, or shareholdings.
2. After you have done this, it is essential that you consider making a Will, to clearly state how your estate should be distributed on your death. If you don’t make a Will then your estate will pass under the intestacy rules, which is a statutory order of priority, and may not align with your wishes.
3. During the process of making your Will you should consider the following
   1. Executors – this is who will deal with the administration of your estate on your death.
   1. Guardians – this allows you to decide who would look after any of your children if you died whilst they are under 18.
   1. The possibility of including and utilising Trusts to best protect your estate for your loved ones. A trust is a legal arrangement where you give control of your assets to trustees to manage and distribute for the benefit of your chosen beneficiaries.
   1. Potential claims against your estate – although it is quite legal to make a Will in whatever terms you wish there is in existence a statute which allows certain categories of persons to make a claim against your estate on your death if they feel that you have failed to make sufficient provisions for them. It is therefore essential you take legal advice to minimise any potential claims against your estate.  

Inheritance Tax Planning

Inheritance tax (IHT) is the tax on the estate of someone who has passed away and is calculated based on their total assets minus liabilities on the date of death. There are various ways of reducing IHT by tax planning during your lifetime and by having a Will that is drafted in a tax.

There are various inheritance tax allowances that you should be aware of. For example, the spouse exemption allows your estate to pass to your spouse or civil partner entirely tax free no matter how large the estate. Another allowance is the charitable exemption which allows money left to charity under a Will to pass entirely tax-free, which can reduce your overall inheritance tax liability.

The above exemptions are only two of many, so it is very important to seek legal advice when it comes to estate planning to avoid missing out on tools available to you.

One of the most efficient ways of decreasing the value of the estate is the use of lifetime gifts. This is the process of giving away assets during your lifetime, rather than waiting until death to leave them to beneficiaries under your Will. This can reduce the overall value of your estate and potentially lower the amount of inheritance tax owed. There are several ways you can do this.

• You may transfer any amount to a spouse or any UK registered charity that is free of the inheritance tax.
• You could also gift non-exempt beneficiaries up to £3,000.00 total annually. This is called an annual exemption. If you haven’t used your annual exemption for the previous tax year, the unused portion can be carried forward for one tax year.
• If a gift is made to an individual but doesn’t fall within any of the exempt categories, it falls within potentially exempt transfers. This means that, providing that you survive for seven years from the date of the gift, the value of the gift will fall out of your estate. If you don’t survive for seven years, the gift is added back to your estate for inheritance tax purposes. However, the longer you survive after making the gift (subject to surviving a minimum of three years), the lower the inheritance tax payable. It is crucial that you also do not retain any benefit from the gift whatsoever or HMRC will not regard it as being outside of your estate no matter how much time has passed.
• You are also eligible to make gifts from your income to any person without affecting your inheritance tax position. This is only if your gifts form part of your normal expenditure and do not affect your quality of life. There must also be a clear, consistent pattern of giving, for example, paying the premiums on a life policy for another person’s benefit or payment of school fees.
• Another way to use lifetime gifts is by making small gifts to any one person. You are allowed to make gifts up to a maximum of £250.00 to any one individual during a tax year. Unlike the annual exemption, however, it is not possible to carry forward any unused portion to the following tax year.
• You may make gifts on the occasion of a marriage or civil partnership, but this has limitations depending on your relationship to the person married. This means that; each parent can gift a maximum of £5,000.00, each grandparent (or remoter ancestor) can gift £2,500.00, either of the couple can gift each other £2,500.00, and any other person can gift £1,000.00. The gift must take place before or on the ceremony and must be conditional on the ceremony taking place.
• Another way to reduce inheritance tax liability is to make inheritance tax efficient investments. We are unable to provide investment advice but can recommend local Independent Financial Advisors who can assist.
• Charitable donations are another efficient way to decrease inheritance tax liability. The Finance Act of 2012 introduced a lower rate of the inheritance tax for individuals who leave a minimum of 10% of their net estates to charity.

Estate planning is not just about securing your assets; it is about securing your loved one’s futures as well as your own. At Aston Bond, we understand that starting this process can be tedious (and daunting!), which is why we strive to simplify it for our clients as best as possible. We tailor our advice based on your individual needs and deal with issues in a considerate and sensitive manner.

So, if you’re ready to take control of your family’s financial future, please book an appointment with our friendly private client department. Just call us on 01753 486 777!

It can be intimidating to navigate the legal landscape, particularly for people who are not familiar with the complex jargon used in the industry. We’ll clear up the confusion around popular legal phrases in this beginner’s guide, giving you the knowledge you need to comprehend courtroom conversations, paperwork, and procedures. Let’s enter the legal field with confidence and clarity.

1. Jurisdiction:
   • Definition: The geographical area or legal boundaries within which a court or authority has the power to make legal decisions.
   • Example: “The court has jurisdiction over cases that occurred within the state.”
2. Litigation:
   • Definition: The process of taking formal legal action; the act or process of carrying making or defending a claim – usually in a Court or Tribunal. .
   • Example: “The parties involved opted for litigation to resolve their dispute.”
3. Claimant and Defendant/Respondent:
   • Definition: The Claimant is the party bringing a legal action, while the defendant/respondent is the party being accused or sued.
   • Example: “The Claimant  alleges breach of contract, and the defendant denies the claims.”
4. Contract:
   • Definition: A legally binding agreement between two or more parties, outlining the terms and obligations.
   • Example: “They signed a contract specifying the terms of their partnership.”
5. Tort:
   • Definition: A wrongful act or an infringement of a right that leads to civil legal liability.
   • Example: “Negligence resulting in personal injury can be a basis for a tort claim.”
6. Criminal Law vs. Civil Law:
   • Definition: Criminal law relates to offenses which breach the rules, procedures or laws that the government imposes on all of its citizens, while civil law deals with disputes or matters between individuals or entities.
   • Example: “Stealing is a criminal offense, while a breach of contract is a civil matter.”
7. Due Diligence:
   • Definition: Thorough research and investigation undertaken before entering into a legal agreement or transaction.
   • Example: “Before acquiring the business, they conducted due diligence to assess potential risks.”
8. Probate:
   • Definition: The legal process of administering the estate of a deceased person.
   • Example: “The Will is currently in probate, and the assets are being distributed accordingly.”
9. Arbitration and Mediation:
   • Definition: Methods of alternative dispute resolution where neutral third parties help parties reach a resolution outside of court.
   • Example: “They opted for arbitration to resolve their contractual dispute.”
10. Solicitor/Barrister:
    • Solicitor: A qualified legal professional who provides advice and representation on various/all areas of law and acts directly for their client.
    • Barrister: usually instructed by a solicitor to advocate in a Court on behalf of their client.  Barristers have specialist knowledge of and experience of the courtroom and therefore cases and their advice and advocacy, whilst working with the instructing solicitor, can make all the difference to a case.

Gaining a better understanding of these frequently used legal terminologies is extremely helpful in navigating the intricate legal landscape.  This guide provides a foundation but your solicitor should always explain things clearly and in a manner you understand.  If they don’t, do not be afraid to ask them!

Here at Aston Bond, we pride ourselves on providing a stress-free and pragmatic approach when you do require legal advice.  No question is too big or too small, and we take the time to ensure our clients are comfortable and understand every step of their journey.

The Bar Council has updated its guidelines for barristers on the use of ChatGPT and other AI technologies.

Although the guidelines confirm that utilising trustworthy AI tools to enhance legal services is not intrinsically wrong, they do highlight the need for barristers to proceed with caution and thoroughly check the work being produced by the AI. The most common risks include information disorder caused by systems unintentionally producing false information, violations of intellectual property rights, and breaches of confidentiality and sensitive information.

The Bar Council is especially concerned about the potential for “hallucinations,” bias, anthropomorphism, and “stereotype reinforcement” on some AI platforms. Indeed, it warned that there has already been at least one case in the UK where a litigant in person presented nine legal “authorities,” all of which turned out to be completely made up by an AI system like ChatGPT.

According to the guidelines, using AI in an irresponsible manner can result in severe and embarrassing outcomes for barristers, such as being sued for professional negligence, breach of contract, breach of confidence, defamation, data protection violations, infringement of intellectual property rights (including passing off claims), and reputational harm. It might also lead to violations of professional obligations and guidelines, which would call for disciplinary action and penalties being imposed.

According to research, new software “should not be a substitute for the exercise of professional judgement, quality legal analysis, and the expertise which clients, courts, and society expect from barristers,” even while technology can “complement and augment human processes to improve efficiency.”

The Bar Council’s chair, Sam Townend KC, stated:

“The growth of AI tools in the legal sector is inevitable and, as the guidance explains, the best-placed barristers will be those who make the effort to understand these systems so that they can be used with control and integrity. Any use of AI must be done carefully to safeguard client confidentiality and maintain trust and confidence, privacy, and compliance with applicable laws.”

He went on: “This Bar Council guidance will support barristers using LLMs to adhere to legal and ethical standards by outlining the key risks and considerations.” “It will be reviewed periodically, and practitioners must remain alert and adjust as the legal and regulatory environment shifts.”

Judges and solicitors were given advice on the use of AI at the end of last year, and this new guidance is the most recent in a series of documents that have been sent to them. The whole topic of AI is a controversial one, particularly within professional fields. One of the concerns is that  it strips away the natural or human aspect of the work, which in turn can potentially damage the reputation and validity of the work.  However, it is clear AI is here to stay and work must now be done on educating lawyers and how best to use AI – and when not too!

A public consultation on the introduction of fees in the Employment Tribunal (ET) and Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) has been opened by the Ministry of Justice.

The Ministry of Justice’s proposed introduction of a £55 fee in the ET and EAT is intended to accomplish the following, among other things:

• To relieve some of the cost to the general taxpayer by requiring tribunal users to pay for the tribunal system, where they can afford to do so.

• To incentivise parties to settle their disputes early through ACAS without the need for claims to be brought to an ET

• To create better engagement by parties in ACAS early conciliation so as to add value for taxpayer money that is spent on providing this free service

• To alleviate some of the pressures the ET are currently facing.

It has been proposed that the fee (which will be payable on issuing the claim) being set at £55 should be moderately affordable for most.

More details can be found here:

Employment Tribunal fees were abolished in 2017 following a case bought by Unison against the government.  The Supreme Court ruled in their favour and ruling that it was unlawful on the grounds of access to justice.  The case (and subsequent abolition of fees) saw a spike in case being presented at the Tribunals.  This has continued to rise steadily over the years with some arguing the lack of fees encourages speculative or weaker cases being presented.

Of course, with a potential change in government things may well change again.  In addition, there is nothing stopping a further challenge in the Courts if fees were re-introduced.   For now however, the more that have their say the better.

Do you agree with the re-introduction of fees?  Let us know your thoughts! The government are now consulting on whether to re-introduce the fees and inviting responses. 

A very interesting case today. The world’s biggest crisps brand is now facing a deadline following a verdict  that they will now have to pay VAT on it’s mini poppadoms because they are more akin to crisps, rather than what they say they are. There is more specifics by law on products being sold  than it may seem! Walkers contended that the Sensations Poppadoms bags should be exempt from the sales tax since they are not crisps (which are included in a specific category of snack items that are liable to the tax, along with cereal bars, ice cream, and chocolate-covered biscuits).  The judge disagreed.

Foods on that list are subject to 20% VAT under the complicated tax regulations.  Because traditional poppadoms are considered restaurant cuisine or food that needs to be prepared further rather than a packaged snack, they receive a zero rating. Previous VAT debates have involved McVitie’s Jaffa Cakes, which tax authorities in the 1990s unsuccessfully argued were biscuits; Pringles, a win for HM Revenue and Customs when they were found to be a crisp; and flapjacks, which were found to be too chewy to be a cake and therefore subject to VAT.

Walkers said that their little poppadoms, which were meant to be eaten with curries or for dipping in sauces, shouldn’t be categorised as crisps because they weren’t made of potatoes and needed to be prepared beforehand. In spite of this, a tax tribunal determined that the “small, generally round, bite-sized objects” were in fact crisps because 40% of the ingredients, including potato starch and granules, were “potato-derived.” The objects were also described as “somewhat wavy, with small bubbles on the surface.”

“Nominative determinism is not a characteristic of snack foods: calling a snack food Hula Hoops does not mean that one could twirl that product around one’s midriff, nor is Monster Munch generally reserved as a food for monsters,” stated the tribunal judges, Anne Fairpo and Sonia Gable.

The idea that Sensations Poppadoms were employed similarly to their larger brethren did not convince them either. Given that we believe there is a practical limit to the amount of dip or chutney that most people are likely to want to combine with the crunch of the conveyor product, we did not believe in practice that they were significantly different from potato crisps in terms of their ability to convey dips, etc.

Walkers have not yet commented on the ruling but may, nevertheless, file an appeal.

The case covers complex tax rules and we always advise getting professional advice on such matters.  At Aston Bond we have worked alongside tax specialists and accountants in the past as needed. However, obtaining advice early on can avoid fines as well as hefty legal costs.

Is it improper for a claimant who used a COT3 agreement to settle a claim of whistleblowing to try to initiate new legal action utilising the same protected disclosures but different detriments?

A COT3 is much like a settlement agreement but settles claims being brought at the Employment Tribunal.  Most settlements agreed through ACAS are in the form of a COT3 (albeit solicitors will often – though not always – get involved in drafting the wording). 

In 2017, the claimant filed a claim at the Employment Tribunal, claiming that she had suffered consequences as a result of her protected disclosures. A COT3 agreement was used to resolve this 2017 dispute through ACAS, and it had a clause stating that the claimant would not “issue any further and/or new claim or claims of any nature against the Respondent… arising from or in relation to the issues/complaints in the Proceedings.”

The Claimant then filed a new tribunal claim in 2021, claiming that the same protected disclosures that had been asserted in the 2017 claim had caused her to suffer fresh harms that were not covered by the COT3. Even though the damages were new, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) determined that she was barred from bringing a new claim that relied  on the same protected disclosures due to the terms of the COT3. According to the EAT, it would be an abuse of process to accept the 2021 claim.

Not just the complaints, but also the “issues” in the procedures were resolved by the COT3. Whether the disclosures that were cited in the 2017 claim were protected disclosures was one of the questions raised. Even if a new claim claimed additional harms, it could not re-litigate that issue since it had already been resolved by the COT3.

It is always advisable to take legal advice on the terms of settling any claims, whether in the guise of settlement agreements or COT3.  

We are experienced in advising on drafting and negotiating claims, both prior to them reaching a Tribunal and afterwards.  If you would like assistance with such matters, our Employment Law team can help.

Contact our Head of employment, Ilinca Mardarescu on imardarescu@astonbond.co.uk

In a surprising revelation, Lord Justice Birss, a Court of Appeal judge in the United Kingdom, has openly admitted to using ChatGPT, an AI chatbot, to draft part of a case ruling.

The judge used the AI chatbot to summarise an area of law, and then copied and pasted the response.

Lord Justice Birss said: “I asked ChatGPT can you give me a summary of this area of law, and it gave me a paragraph.”

While Lord Justice Birss praised the tool’s efficiency, he also emphasised the importance of not relying on AI for unfamiliar subjects.  He was keen to point out that he already knew the answer and so was able to judge whether the response given by the AI was acceptable.  Essentially, it was used as a tool to speed up the drafting of the judgment.

AI-driven tools are increasingly used for legal research, contract analysis, and document review tasks. This incident highlights the evolving role of AI in the legal field and raises important questions about its limitations.

The judge also described the AI chatbot as “jolly useful” for providing a summary of the legal context he needed.

Legal professionals must exercise caution when employing AI tools, especially in critical decision-making processes. Relying on AI-generated content can lead to serious consequences and it is important to note that AI may not have the latest response or position in an ever-changing field.

Lord Justice Birss asserted that he still took full personal responsibility for the content of his judgment, stressing that he was not attempting to shift responsibility onto the AI tool.

The incident underscores the importance of responsible AI use and the need for legal professionals to maintain a keen sense of judgment in their work.

As AI continues to advance, the legal community must strike a balance between harnessing AI’s potential and upholding the principles of legal practice.

Congratulations to Lauren Johnson who has recently qualified as a Solicitor within our Dispute Resolution team!

Lauren Joined the firm in October 2021 and is experienced in dealing with a range of litigation matters.

Some words from Lauren:

 “My training as Aston Bond has been an incredibly valuable experience. The opportunities and range of work I have been involved in at Aston Bond has given me a great insight into working in litigation.

I was able to have plenty of client interaction during my training which is important as I was able to gain an understanding of how to communicate with clients from start to finish on their matters.

I am very grateful to have been given the chance to train with Aston Bond and I look forward to continuing to develop my skills as a solicitor within the litigation team.”  

 At Aston Bond we are extremely proud of Lauren and she has worked extremely hard to achieve her goal as a qualified solicitor!