Coronavirus Bill, LAs and the right to emergency volunteering leave

March 21st, 2020 by Peter Oldham QC in General, Local Authority Powers

Cl 7 of the Coronavirus Bill gives effect to Schedule 6 –  provisions about a new right to emergency volunteering leave (“EVL”).

Under Schedule 6, a worker is entitled to be absent from work for the period specified in an emergency volunteering certificate (“EVC”) if, no later than 3 days before the first day of the period specified in the EVC, the worker gives notice to their employer of their intention to be absent for the period stated in the EVC.   The EVC may specify two, three or four consecutive weeks within a single volunteering period.  A volunteering period is the period of 16 weeks after the right under the Bill comes into force and each period of 16 weeks thereafter, unless shortened by the Secretary of State in regulations.  A worker may take EVL only once in the same volunteering period.  If a worker takes EVL, they have the right to return to their job, and not to suffer detriment as a result.  Dismissal by reason of EVL is automatically unfair.  Under cl 8 SoS must establish a scheme to compensate volunteers for lost income and expenses incurred.

LAs are given an important role.  The EVC is a document issued by “an appropriate authority”, a category which includes the Secretary of State, the NHS Commissioning Board, and local authorities – county councils, district councils where there is no county council, London boroughs and the City.

The EVC certifies that the worker has been approved by the appropriate authority as an emergency volunteer in health or social care.

The Government’s document “Coronavirus Bill – Summary of Impacts” tells us what the Government’s expectation of LAs is likely to be. It says:-

“Impact on Local Authorities – the policy requires LAs across the UK to identify volunteer social care opportunities and to match these opportunities to volunteers coming forward. This may add additional burdens to the work that LAs are doing in response to the outbreak. HM Government will provide detailed guidance for LAs to follow and will design a simple system in collaboration with them that is easy to administer. Additional funding may also be required.”

Peter Oldham QC

 

Judicial Review

March 20th, 2020 by James Goudie KC in Housing

In R ( NOLSON ) v STEVENAGE BOROUGH COUNCIL (2020) EWCA 379, at paragraph 18, the Court of Appeal, per Hickinbottom LJ, gives important guidance on applications, including not least applications for interim relief.

 

Adjudication and Fraud

March 19th, 2020 by James Goudie KC in Judicial Control, Liability and Litigation

In PBS v BESTER (2020) EWCA 404 Coulson LJ at paragraph 23 stated principles with respect to enforcement of compulsory adjudication awards in the construction industry when there are allegations of fraud, as follows : (1) If the allegations of fraud were made, or could and should have been made, in the adjudication, that cannot subsequently amount to a reason not to enforce the decision; (2) If on the other hand (I) the adjudicator’ s decision was arguably procured by fraud or (I) where the material relied upon by the adjudicator is shown to be both (a) material and (b) arguably fraudulent and (iii) the allegation of fraud could not have been raised in the adjudication, such allegations can be a proper ground for resisting enforcement.

 

Coronavirus Bill

March 19th, 2020 by Peter Oldham QC in Local Authority Powers

As most relevant to English local authorities’ powers and duties, the Bill provides for the following, amongst other, measures – with a great deal of further detail:-

Read more »

 

Rateable Occupation

March 19th, 2020 by James Goudie KC in Council Tax and Rates

ATOS v FYLDE BOROUGH COUNCIL (2020) EWHC 647 ( QB ) is concerned with the liability, or rather non-liability, of persons for non-domestic rates in circumstances where the person said to be liable does not occupy the entirety of the hereditament in the relevant rating list, and part is let to others. Saini J reviewed the statutory framework and case law at paras 23-68 and gave his main conclusion at paras 69-75 : essentially rateable occupation has to be exclusive occupation. The Judge approved Ryde on Rating : “ if the whole building is entered in the rating list as one hereditament, no one tenant is liable for the rate of the whole, because he is not the occupier of the whole, nor can he be compelled to pay the rate on the part he occupies…”

 

Covid-19 and Procurement

March 19th, 2020 by Peter Oldham QC in Decision making and Contracts

The Cabinet Office has published a note entitled “Procurement Policy Note – Responding to COVID-19”, PPN 01/10.  It says

Read more »

 

Confidentiality

March 19th, 2020 by James Goudie KC in Judicial Control, Liability and Litigation

On “ Confidentiality Rings” in civil litigation, see INFDERATION Ltd v GOOGLE LLC (2020) EWHC 657(Ch) at paras 27-47 inc.

 

Urgent Contracts

March 19th, 2020 by James Goudie KC in Decision making and Contracts

A Procurement Policy Note has been published on 18 March 2020 on responding to COVID -19, and in particular, but not only, using the urgency derogation in PCR Reg 32(2)(c) and other procurement Regs : “designed to deal with this sort of situation”; “not something that was foreseeable”. The Note emphasises that in order to use this exemption the contracting authority must be able to demonstrate genuine reasons for extreme urgency and satisfy other conditions, and keep a written record of the justification and achieve value for money.

 

Some thoughts on Local Authorities and Coronavirus

March 18th, 2020 by Peter Oldham QC in Decision making and Contracts, Human Rights and Public Sector Equality Duty, Judicial Control, Liability and Litigation, Local Authority Powers, Social Care

This note sets out some information and personal views about local authority decision making in the light of the current crisis.

Read more »

 

Judicial Review Costs

March 16th, 2020 by James Goudie KC in Judicial Control, Liability and Litigation

In R (Parreen) v Redbridge LBC (2020) EWCA Civ 194 the Court of Appeal has reiterated the principles that should be applied when dealing with the costs of judicial review proceedings which have been withdrawn or settled prior to a full hearing in circumstances where the claimant has obtained all or some of the relief claimed. It is necessary to identify the “successful party”, but success consists not only in obtaining the relief sought, but also obtaining it earlier than would otherwise have been the case.  The Court of Appeal also reiterated  however that investigation of such matters has to be kept within reasonable and proportionate bounds; and that the fact that the claimant obtained the relief sought did not necessarily mean that the proceedings had caused or contributed to that outcome.

 

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »