Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Danny Schwarz and Stephen Dodge discuss the redevelopment of Oxford Street in Property Week

Posted on: October 2nd, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

Head of Commercial Real Estate Danny Schwarz and Trainee Solicitor Stephen Dodge explore the proposed pedestrianisation of Oxford Street, and discuss its potential impact on London’s retail and hospitality sectors, in Property Week.

Danny and Stephen’s article was published in Property Week, 2 October 2024, and can be found here.

Facelift will revive Oxford Street

Some shops may lose out, but pedestrianisation plan will broaden iconic retail destination’s tenant mix.

Last month, London mayor Sadiq Khan announced radical plans to pedestrianise London’s iconic Oxford Street. This proposal, Khan’s second for the famous high street, appears likely to succeed thanks to a Labour-led Westminster council, and for Oxford Street the timing could not be better; it is ripe for revitalisation.

The pandemic resulted in a slew of notable Oxford Street shop closures. With tourism statistics showing footfall is still yet to fully recover, it is clear that the retail district is struggling. This is hardly surprising; Oxford Street is often not London’s most desirable destination. Its pavements are cramped, the thoroughfare is plagued by antisocial drivers and the shopfronts are infested with much-derided American candy shops.

So, how will pedestrianisation breathe new life into Oxford Street? Case studies on the pedestrianisation of locations such as nearby Carnaby Street or Copenhagen’s Strøget Street are telling. Despite objections from business owners, particularly restaurateurs, these streets were closed to traffic and experienced significant increases in footfall. Local businesses benefited from an increase in customers.

However, there are risks involved in this latest proposal for Oxford Street. Prior to the announcement of plans for pedestrianisation, the post-pandemic rebound was in full swing on the street. Property vacancies are down 40% from 2023, with leasing activity breaking records in that year and remaining high now. With rents rising for commercial tenants on and around Oxford Street, mere speculation on the pedestrianisation proposal is likely to see rents continue to spike. The value of freehold titles could similarly creep upwards.

Tenants subject to upcoming rent review may see rates rise far beyond their short-run means and there is a risk that landlords may see an opportunity to trade up tenants, exercising break clauses to hike rents. Property lawyers will be busy with a flurry of breaks, renewals and disputes.

However, tenants on fixed rents may be buoyed by increased footfall and have a highly profitable few years. Tenants with high-volume businesses also stand to win regardless of their rents, as greater footfall will correlate directly to sales.

Winners and losers
Unfortunately, not everyone will be a winner as a result of Khan’s proposal. Low-volume luxury shops are often more reliant on patronage from customers who arrive by car and may prefer to move elsewhere, as their clients will not wish to brave crowds. At the other end of the spectrum, accessibility will be hampered by pedestrianisation, further inconveniencing those reliant on cabs or buses.

If these long-standing and successful luxury businesses fail, landlords will be seriously affected. Those who relied on the status quo, and did not obtain adequate guarantees or security at their last lease renewal, may also find themselves as low-ranking creditors in protracted insolvencies.

What is clear is that disruption creates opportunity and Oxford Street has already begun to change – no longer are all leases on the high street exclusively for retail use. Parts of John Lewis and similar buildings are being converted to office space, bringing a new type of consumer to the area, while parts of Debenhams are being converted for leisure use, alongside the openings of new entertainment venues. Spaces left behind in the ongoing – and welcome – retreat of American candy shops are similarly ripe for conversion into cafés, which could apply for pavement seating.

A new type of tenant, with a new clientele and different priorities, is coming to Oxford Street. Landlords may find it difficult to adjust to this new normal, but those who can be flexible and see the potential in their new tenants stand to gain from the new face of London’s iconic retail district.

If you would like further information regarding your obligations as tenants/landlords of retail spaces, please contact a member of our Commercial Real Estate team.

Lawrence Stephens’ teams ranked by Legal 500 UK 2025

Posted on: October 2nd, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

Lawrence Stephens is proud to have been recognised in the 2025 edition of the Legal 500 UK directory. Our Real Estate Finance and Banking teams have been ranked as Tier 7 in the Property Finance category, and our Sports and Entertainment team has achieved a Tier 5 ranking in the Sport category within the TMT (Technology, Media and Telecoms) section.

We were also delighted to learn that Angélique Richardson, an Associate in our Sports and Entertainment team, has been recognised as a ‘Leading Associate’ for her exceptional contribution and commitment to providing top-tier legal and career management advice to elite athletes.

The Legal 500 UK edition provides a comprehensive overview of the top law firms in the United Kingdom. It includes detailed qualitative reviews from many law firms, barristers’ chambers, and individual lawyers. The rankings are based on feedback from law firm clients which helps firms benchmark their expertise and performance in various areas.

Managing Director Steven Bernstein said: “It is fantastic to see the firm recognised in this way. While it is no surprise, we are delighted to see the firm listed amongst the best in the country and shows just how far we have come. We look forward to building on these foundations and seeing more of our people and teams achieving this distinction.”

Employment law insight: New obligations regarding the fair distribution of tips

Posted on: October 1st, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

October 2024

The Employment (Allocation of Tips) Act 2023 (“the Act”), supplemented by a statutory code of practice and associated non-statutory guidance, comes into force today, 1 October 2024.

The Act significantly impacts the hospitality industry by introducing new rules governing how employers must deal with tips paid by customers, and it is estimated it will lead to an additional £200m being taken home by millions of workers in the UK.

The new requirements

The new legislation affects all retail and hospitality businesses including restaurants, cafes, hotels, hairdressers and taxi firms.

Businesses must now ‘fairly allocate’ all tips received. In addition, tips must be paid straight to workers and cannot be retained by the employer for any reason, including for business expenses.

“Tips” includes gratuities and service charges. However, it does not include cash tips if those are received by a worker and not declared to the employer. It does not matter if the tip is made by card, cash, or via an app.

In addition, employers must not make any deductions from tips except for tax, and where appropriate, National Insurance.

Tips must be paid to the worker/employee no later than the end of the month following the month in which it was paid by the customer.

What does fairly allocating tips mean?

The statutory code states that allocating and distributing tips fairly does not necessarily require employers to allocate the same proportion of tips to all workers, providing there are legitimate reasons why different workers are allocated different proportions.

The code provides examples of the criteria that employers may consider when allocating tips, such as:

  • the number of hours worked in the period the tips were collected;
  • individual and team performance;
  • level of responsibility and/or seniority;
  • customer intention;
  • length of service;
  • type of role (e.g., front of house or back of house); and
  • rate of basic pay.

The code prevents employers from pooling tips from multiple sites and all individuals who are involved in providing a direct service to customers should be considered as part of the distribution, including agency workers.

What do employers need to do?

Unless employers only receive tips on a very occasional or exceptional basis, they will need a written policy in place relating to the collection and distribution of tips.

They will also need to decide on their chosen method of tip distribution. How employers distribute is up to them, as long as it is fair. Some employers may choose to allow each individual worker to retain 100% of their tips received, whereas some employers may choose to implement a tronc system. However, using a tronc does not absolve employers of their responsibilities, so they will need to be careful to ensure the use of a tronc system is appropriate and that it is properly and fairly implemented. Employers should consider whether it is appropriate to seek the agreement of their staff as to which system of allocation will be used.

Employers must keep records of the qualifying tips received and how these are distributed. These records must be kept for three years from the date the tip was received and staff may request copies.

It is recommended that regular checks are made to ensure tips are being distributed in line with policies. It is also recommended that policies are regularly reviewed in line with business changes, such as restructurings or redundancies.

Connected obligations

Employers should be mindful of their data protection obligations when sharing records of tips. Employers should not provide details of the specific amounts paid to other workers, nor other people’s personal data, such as their bank details. Instead they should provide the total amount of qualifying tips received and the amount paid to the worker making the request.

Tips do not form any part of the National Minimum Wage. Employers must ensure that workers are paid in line with the National Minimum Wage and National Living Wage requirements regardless of any tips the worker may receive. 

How should an employer deal with complaints relating to tips?

The code of practice states that parties should attempt to resolve issues relating to tips between themselves. It is therefore imperative that any complaints are investigated and dealt with properly, either informally (if appropriate) or under a suitable grievance procedure.  

If the matter cannot be resolved internally, a member of staff may make a claim in the employment tribunal and they may be awarded up to £5,000 to compensate them for any financial losses relating to their employer’s failure(s).

If you have any questions on the fair distribution of tips or need assistance regarding your compliance with the new legislation, please contact a member of our Employment team.

Emma Cocker comments on ageism in the private wealth sector in eprivateclient

Posted on: October 1st, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

Senior Associate in the Employment team Emma Cocker comments on ageism in the private wealth sector, and how firms should be proactive in tackling this form of discrimination, in eprivateclient.

Emma’s comments were published in eprivateclient, 27 September 2024, and can be found here

“Employing older workers brings tangible benefits. These individuals often possess a depth of experience that younger workers may not, as well as an ability to connect with older clients. This is particularly important as statistics show that older individuals hold the bulk of private wealth within the UK. As such, workplace ageism ought not to be a problem in the private wealth sector, but this is unfortunately not the case. 

“The Equality Act 2010 protects against age discrimination in all aspects of employment including recruitment, terms and conditions, promotions, training and dismissals. Treating a worker less favourably simply because of their age, or in any way connected to their age, is (with very limited exceptions) illegal and should be avoided. Employment Tribunals are quick to root out issues of age discrimination, even in cases where employers attempt to dress up ageism as a legitimate reason for less favourable treatment. Compensation can be high, and cases attract adverse publicity.

“Leaving aside the risks of litigation, firms should be proactive in tackling age discrimination because of the noted benefits of employing older staff. This starts with the recruitment process where “blind recruitment” should be used to eradicate bias based on an applicant’s personal characteristics, including their age. Firms should also use initiatives such as discrimination and diversity training, as well as ensuring workplace policies do not discriminate on the grounds of age. Employee rewards ought to be based on performance and not length of service, and assumptions regarding “slowing down”, or older people being more likely to accept redundancies, should also be avoided.”

Danny Schwarz and Sophie Levitt discuss the proposed outdoor smoking ban in The Times

Posted on: September 26th, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

Director and Head of Commercial Real Estate, Danny Schwarz, and Solicitor Sophie Levitt discuss the potential impact of the proposed outdoor smoking ban on the hospitality sector, as well as the legal implications for landlords and tenants, in The Times.

Danny and Sophie’s article was published in The Times, 26 September 2024.

Ministers are considering imposing stricter rules on outdoor smoking to reduce the number of preventable deaths connected to tobacco use. There are no final plans, but smoking could be banned in pub gardens, outdoor restaurants and sports grounds.

The proposed ban appears as a puritanical tendency to reach for authoritarian solutions to complex public health problems. When politicians choose to cement their intolerance of the behaviour of others through legislation, it restricts individual freedom, further eroding people’s right to choose what they can do and where they can do it.

Arguably, such misuse of state control is antidemocratic: an extreme anti-smoking agenda which is not supported by scientific evidence that smoking in the open air creates any quantifiable threat to public health.

And now the British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA) is pleading with the government to abandon plans for greater smoking restrictions in pubs since it would affect their viability as businesses. But not all pubs would be impacted equally by such a ban. For instance, gastropubs are less worried about a slowdown following the ban, given the focus of their business on serving full meals, typically indoors.

While there is some disagreement within the hospitality industry regarding the precise impact of such a ban, there is a broad consensus that beefed up rules need to be clearly worded and ‘outdoor area’ must be precisely defined to minimise uncertainty.

A pub garden smoking ban could affect both landlords and tenants. If the ban has a heavy impact on the viability of tenants’ businesses, they may be unable to generate enough income to pay their rent. Landlords may have to forfeit leases, leaving them with vacant possession and the need to remarket the property.

Tenants would be obliged to comply with the smoking ban, which could be outlined expressly in leases or implied under a compliance with laws clause. If the tenant used the property in a manner which was not permitted, the landlord could forfeit the lease and end the unlawful use. Alternatively, the landlord could claim damages if they suffered any loss because of the tenant’s breach.

While the government’s proposals have received support from public health experts, many landlords, operators and customers have voiced concern that the rules would be unenforceable.

Bar staff would have to police this ban in addition to their existing obligations. Smokers would crowd on pavements outside of pubs, which would cause disturbance and nuisance to neighbours, or breach licence conditions, particularly in residential areas. Smoking could also be prohibited in parks and therefore create confusion in public spaces as it would be difficult to police.

If you are needing advice on matters relating to the hospitality sector or the legal obligations of landlords and tenants in commercial real estate, please contact a member of our Commercial Real Estate team.

Lawrence Stephens advises Genuine Dining on its acquisition by WSH

Posted on: September 26th, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

Lawrence Stephens advised workplace caterer Genuine Dining and its shareholders, including investor Luke Johnson and CEO Chris Mitchell, on its acquisition by WSH, a leading food and hospitality company.

This acquisition by WSH will support Genuine Dining’s growth and development in partnership with an industry-leading business.

The team was led by Director James Lyons and Managing Director Steven Bernstein, with assistance from Solicitors Lucy Cadley, Carla Bernstein, and Avni Patel from our Corporate and Commercial team. Employment advice was provided by Senior Associate Joanne Leach and Solicitor Becci Collins.

CEO of Genuine Dining, Chris Mitchell, commented: “The excellent advice and personal attention of the team at Lawrence Stephens were a huge help in making this transaction as smooth as possible.

Director James Lyons added: “We are delighted to have advised the selling shareholders of Genuine Dining on this significant transaction – Lawrence Stephens has worked alongside Luke, Chris and the rest of the Genuine Dining team for a number of years and the sale to WSH marks an exciting moment in the continued growth ambitions of the business.”

If you need assistance with a corporate transaction or need advice on the drafting of employment agreements, please contact a member of our Corporate and Commercial or Employment teams.

Matt Green interviewed by The Law Society Gazette

Posted on: September 23rd, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

Head of Blockchain and Digital Assets, Matt Green, discusses his path into law and his role in some of the most complex and high-profile crypto cases, in The Law Society Gazette’s ‘My Legal Life’.

Matt’s interview was published in The Law Society Gazette, 13 September 2024.

My path to law was inspired by experience. As with most lawyers, studying English and history as an undergraduate set me up to appreciate constructing arguments, so this training was at its core. Plus, and entirely separately, my dad went through a divorce when I was younger and seeing the influence respective legal teams had on outcomes was astounding. Separately again, I worked at a record label (Anjunabeats) for a short stint and the legal element was always the most interesting.

My journey to blockchain and digital assets started with an inherent focus on intellectual property law and technology. With law school friend Anand Pandya, we set up legal news platform IPHarbour, writing about media, data, soft intellectual property, and technology disputes and cases. I was learning about blockchain, machine learning, cloud computing and artificial intelligence which was where intellectual property and technology broadly met at the time. In 2019, I was given the opportunity to work on a unique case, with the firm asking if anyone knew anything about blockchain and bitcoin. I volunteered.

The case was AA v Persons Unknown, Re: Bitcoin. Counsel Darragh Connell and I were in court just before Christmas that year applying for a proprietary injunction over bitcoin paid by an insurer following a ransomware attack on a Canadian hospital. The UK Jurisdiction Taskforce had just published its legal statement on crypto-assets and smart contracts, concluding crypto-assets ‘have all the indicia of property’. This case resulted in crypto-assets at large attracting property rights at common law, a point ratified in the Court of Appeal shortly afterwards. Following thorough work from the Law Commission, including iterative reports on the treatment of digital assets, cryptocurrencies (described as ‘things’ including those digital or electronic in nature that do not fall neatly into traditional definitions of property) become property at law via legislation, with the introduction of the Property (Digital Assets etc.) Bill on 11 September.

’Matters have included pursuing North Korean hackers following a $100m loss at a crypto custodian, to scams involving blackmail through dating apps, and fake investment scams with too-good-to-be-true profits’

I was hugely fortunate to work on that initial AA case. Since then, there has been a career pivot, relying on intellectual property and an understanding of technology to deal with complex issues involving blockchain. Also, the treatment of digital assets, utilising distributed ledger technology analytics to retrieve, release or help deal with assets such as bitcoin, ether and tether, using expert evidence and court processes where needed.  

I am typically instructed to assist with the recovery of digital assets, although in other cases I help release digital assets from freezers and advise generally where blockchain technology and or digital assets are at play. Unfortunately, because people do not know who scammed or hacked them, and because there is a pretence that assets disappear into the ether, there is a strong but false narrative that there are no routes to recovery. Under the right circumstances, recovery is very real. Matters have included pursuing North Korean hackers following a $100m loss at a crypto custodian, to scams involving blackmail through dating apps, and fake investment scams with too-good-to-be-true profits.

I was instructed by an individual who claimed to be the inventor of bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, and sought to exercise his copyrights over bitcoin-related content. He was put to proof in the High Court earlier this year and was unsuccessful. If he had won, the functionality and future of bitcoin would look very different. The separate (but linked) case of Tulip Trading involved the loss of assets which purported to give access to billions of pounds worth of bitcoin, and under previous advisers, looked to form a new duty of care of software developers.

It is important to remember that everything is a learning opportunity. Those cases were both academically and procedurally interesting, and I have some excellent war stories (subject to the usual privilege rules). I am very lucky to have worked on some of the leading crypto-asset cases (with talented counsel and opposition). From the early days, this involved convincing a judge that these assets could be property, to now working with specialists in resolving complex issues deriving from continuously developing technology.’

Employment law insight: Mohammed Al Fayed allegations and an employer’s duty to prevent sexual harassment at work

Posted on: September 20th, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

A recent BBC article highlighted that more than 20 female former employees have come forward to report their experience of sexual assault (and in five cases, rape) whilst working at Harrods.

This is unfortunately the latest in a series of high-profile sexual harassment cases in the workplace. The effect of such behaviour is extremely damaging, not least because of the risk of costly employment tribunal claims against employers, but also because the significant reputational damage inflicted affects the ability of organisations to attract and retain staff, as well as potentially losing them valuable customers. Cases of sexual misconduct undoubtedly affect businesses’ “bottom line”.

What is the law on preventing sexual harassment in the workplace?

While these latest allegations relate to cases of sexual assault and rape, these cases are thankfully rare. What is much less rare is allegations of sexual harassment at work.

Sexual harassment is unwanted conduct of a sexual nature which has the purpose or effect of either violating the person’s dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.

The scope is broad and includes a wide range of behaviours. As the effect of sexual harassment is viewed subjectively (i.e. through the eyes of the victim) it is not uncommon for accused individuals to claim their behaviour was “banter” or, “a compliment” when it was, in fact, sexual harassment.

As well as the accused individual’s responsibility for sexual harassment, employers may also be responsible (or “vicariously liable”) for the conduct of their employees (and in some cases, other third parties such as customers). This can be the case even where they did not condone, or even know, the conduct had occurred.

Legislation will shortly come into force which increases the burden on employers to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace, making it even more important that employers are aware of, and acting in line with, their duties.   

The new duty

The Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023 is due to come into force on the 26 October 2024 and creates an anticipatory duty on the employer to take reasonable steps to actively prevent the sexual harassment of their employees; not just to investigate them if they arise.

This is a law which was passed by the last government, but the current government is considering further extending this duty to require employers to take ‘all’ reasonable steps, rather than the reasonable steps that will be required from 26 October 2024.

What should employers do to comply with their new duties?

Having clear sexual harassment policies and procedures, providing anti-sexual harassment training and encouraging a “speak-up” culture are all critical steps for employers. Taking time to consider where the risks lie in a specific working environment, as well as the sector in which the organisation operates will help determine what further action needs to be taken. All of the above should be regularly reviewed and monitored.

Supporting HR managers in dealing with sexual harassment claims is also crucial. They are likely to be the first employee in a senior leadership position to whom such claims are reported and they must be well equipped to deal with allegations appropriately to avoid further potential damage to the organisation.  

What should a business do if a claim of sexual harassment is raised at work?

Any allegations should be properly investigated under an anti-harassment policy or grievance policy and appropriate action should be taken, based on the conduct identified.

Employers that are regulated, such as financial services organisations regulated by the FCA and/or PRA must remember that a failure to investigate and resolve such allegations could lead to regulatory investigations, as well as possible enforcement action.

The behaviour did not take place at their place of work – does this matter?

No. Employers may be liable for sexual harassment committed by their employees ‘in the course of employment’, meaning any place the employee is working, not just their regular place of work. Liability can also attach to acts committed when employees are not working but they are somewhere connected with work. This could include, for example, social drinks after work and Christmas parties.

Creating a culture of acceptable behaviour

It is important that employers create a workplace culture that minimises the risk of sexual harassment. Sometimes sexual harassment can stem from other inappropriate behaviours not being properly investigated and addressed. Turning a blind eye to these behaviours can fail to set the tone as to what is appropriate and inappropriate in the workplace, leading to costly claims against employers.  

If you have any questions on the new duty to prevent sexual harassment, or how to investigate allegations of sexual harassment, or if you require workplace training, please contact a member of our employment team.

Tesco loses its Supreme Court ‘fire and rehire’ fight

Posted on: September 19th, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

The practice of terminating an individual’s employment to re-employ them on new terms (known as ‘fire and re-hire’) has always been controversial. This is because it is typically used to implement unfavourable changes to employees’ contracts.

The Government is tightening up on such practices, and in July, issued a fire and re-hire code of practice which made it clear fire and re-hire should only be used in very limited circumstances. Now, the Supreme Court has granted an injunction to prevent Tesco from firing and re-engaging employees on lower compensation.

In 2007, Tesco inserted a clause into its contracts which provided for retention payment awards as an incentive for employees to relocate to other sites following the closure of distribution centres. In 2021, Tesco attempted to remove this clause and threatened anyone who did not agree with the termination of their employment. Consequently, the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers (USDAW) brought action against Tesco seeking an injunction to prevent the termination of the contracts, arguing the 2007 change was intended to be permanent. USDAW won an injunction in 2022 which stopped Tesco from carrying out its plans, but Tesco got that ruling overturned on appeal.

On 12 September 2024, the Supreme Court reversed that decision. Commenting that the individuals had been induced to make significant and permanent changes to their lives by relocating, the Judges made it clear that any limitation to the change should have been negotiated in 2007.

Employers may be concerned that this decision significantly narrows when fire and re-hire can be used. They may also be concerned that it sets a precedent for injunctive relief to be granted to protect employees from dismissal, which is rare. However, cases like these are fact-specific: the injunction was granted in a case where the affected individuals made a life-changing move in return for compensation during the performance of the contract – and it was not specified at the relevant time that the additional compensation could be taken away.

The Government has previously indicated that it intends to ban fire and re-hire, and following this judgment, the Department for Business and Trade has stated that new legislation shall be brought in soon. In the meantime, there are occasions where the use of fire and re-hire could still be appropriate, particularly if the alternatives are for employees to be retained on terms which significantly damage the business, or risks mass redundancies, or even for a business to cease trading entirely. The Tesco matter was different and was a situation which was said to be “unrealistic” and “flouting industrial common sense”.  However, it does highlight how careful employers must be when agreeing contractual variations, and, in particular, how employers ought to carefully consider the duration of any proposed changes.

If you have any question about the drafting or varying of employment terms and any related issues, please contact a member of our Employment team.

Abtin Yeganeh comments on the Renters’ Rights Bill in Property Week

Posted on: September 18th, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

Head of Real Estate Disputes, Abtin Yeganeh, comments on the Renters’ Rights Bill and how the proposed legislation must carefully balance the rights of tenants and security for landlords.

Abtin’s comments were published in Property Week, 11 September 2024, and can be found here.

“While the proposed Renters’ Rights Bill will be welcomed by the majority of UK tenants, providing them stronger legal protections and implementing a ban on ‘no-fault evictions’, the proposed reforms must strike a balance between the rights of tenants and security for landlords.

“No-fault evictions create a degree of uncertainty for many, with landlords able to evict their tenants without cause at the end of the fixed term of the tenancy. The new bill proposes to abolish this practice, and provide tenants with greater peace of mind.

“No-fault evictions have previously provided landlords with security, as they know they can obtain possession at the end of the tenancy without cause, and the banning of no-fault evictions may therefore provide them with cause for concern. However, importantly, the bill will reform the grounds of possession, with new grounds being introduced to address repeated serious arrears, and situations where possession is required to allow the landlord to sell a property or for the landlord and/or family members to occupy the property.”

If you would like further information on the implications of the Renters’ Rights Bill or have any questions regarding landlord/tenant matters, please contact Abtin Yeganeh

Feenix Group and Lawrence Stephens partner to launch Feenix Talent

Posted on: September 18th, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

We are delighted to announce our partnership with Feenix Group to create Feenix Talent.

A new esports and gaming agency bridging the gap between esports, entertainment, and gaming. Feenix Talent will manage top esports players, gaming creators, and influencers, helping them build careers that last. Our partnership will ensure talent is legally supported every step of the way.

Brands looking to work with the best talent in gaming will find their perfect match with Feenix Talent.

 

Matt Green comments on D’Aloia v Persons Unknown and Others

Posted on: September 18th, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

Head of Blockchain and Digital Assets, Matt Green, comments on the recent case of D’Aloia v Persons Unknown and Others and discusses how this case will impact future cases involving the recovery of stolen or hacked cryptocurrency.

Matt’s comments were published in Law360CDR Magazine, CoinTelegraph and CoinLive.

“This is a lesson for all blockchain analytic report providers to ensure evidence is articulated and evidenced in the clearest terms. It is vital that legal teams understand the fact patterns carefully in order to advance proprietary claims and ensure mixing issues are dealt with accordingly. Legal teams need to scrutinise evidence, using experience and knowledge of blockchain technology and movements of funds, in order to ensure cases are put forward properly.

“The heads of case need to be carefully considered with an understanding of how purported organised criminal gangs may operate, and the potential mixing processes at play.

“As a strategy, it is always best to follow the funds and then seek to work cooperatively with exchanges who can play vital roles in assisting asset recovery.

“This is an unfortunate outcome if the relevant purported money mule Defendants are indeed laundering money, but the team failed to evidence it to the Court’s satisfaction. Hopefully, there will be more positive open judgements that show that the cryptoasset recovery process is real and effective, when done right.

“The targets should be those who receive the funds – in this instance it appears as though the Claimant was pursuing the wrong parties.”