Bölümler
-
In this episode, our special guest is Miles Bake, the former Head of Enforcement at the Bank of England and the Director of Governance at the FCA. In a fascinating discussion, he offers a glimpse into the inner workings of the UK’s financial services regulators.
Special guest Miles Bake shares his take on what makes financial services regulators tick. This is something he’s uniquely placed to do, having worked extensively in leadership roles at the Prudential Regulatory Authority (PRA) and at the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).
In this episode, host Nathan Willmott and his Ashurst colleague Adam Jamieson ask Miles the burning questions that financial services firms often ask, including:
Why have the financial services regulators increasingly leaned harder into enforcement in recent years? How do regulators determine which firms do and don’t get referred for investigations? In the absence of targets or metrics, how do regulators decide the appropriate level of enforcement? Since the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards, how successful has the senior managers regime been? How aligned or divergent are the FCA and PRA’s enforcement policies and actions? During investigations, how do regulators balance the need for transparency with firms’ reputational risks? When enforcement heads consider policy decisions, how do they determine when government consultation is required? Considering the FCA’s aim to promote competitiveness, how might enforcement policy be shaped by the government’s growth agenda?To hear Miles tackle these questions (and to subscribe to future episodes in our enforcement mini-series) search for “Ashurst Legal Outlook” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In a bid to root out harm before it occurs, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is stepping up its use of intervention tools as an alternative to formal investigations.
In this episode, we explain some quite draconian FCA powers – ‘voluntary requirements’ (VREQs) and ‘own initiative requirements’ (OIREQs) – and how these are impacting financial services firms.
To tackle this thorny subject, we’ve gathered a crack team of specialists in financial services regulation. Host Nathan Willmott is joined by his Ashurst colleague Adam Jamieson and special guest Oliver Assersohn KC of XXIV Old Buildings.
Together, they unpack how these intervention powers allow the FCA to impose restrictions on firms without formal investigations, often pressuring them into compliance within tight deadlines. The trio explain the legal thresholds for these requirements, the increasing willingness of the FCA to test these boundaries, and how firms are responding.
As well as outlining the practicalities of negotiating with the FCA, our expert panel flags the risks for firms during interventions and the potential for challenging the requirements in the Upper Tribunal.
To hear this (and to subscribe to future episodes in season two of our enforcement mini-series) search for “Ashurst Legal Outlook” on Apple Podcasts,
Spotify, or your preferred podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Eksik bölüm mü var?
-
How effective have new Consumer Duty protections been since being introduced by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in 2023? How have financial services firms responded? And what kind of enforcement risks should firms be concerned about?
Now that the dust has somewhat settled, this podcast looks at the impact of new consumer protections introduced by the FCA in 2023. For many financial services firms this has been a huge shift; requiring a fresh approach to regulation, governance, management information, and more.
In this episode, Ashurst colleagues Nathan Willmott, Jake Green and Adam Jamieson offer a balanced view of the relative highs and lows of the Consumer Duty so far. They discuss the FCA’s focus on vulnerable customers, analyse the regulator's communications explaining its expectations to firms, and reflect on the FCA’s broadly positive view of how firms have responded.
While acknowledging the administrative burden on firms, Adam and Jake agree that the Duty has had a positive cultural impact. And Nathan points out that the Duty is one way in which the FCA is using a broader toolkit to get firms to do what it wants them to do.
Our expert panel also point out some areas of concern (including hidden costs and the unpredictability of where enforcement may occur), and they highlight some of the FCA’s learning experiences to date. The trio discuss what “doing the right thing” means in practice and how much risk this carries for regulated firms. And finally, they suggest some modifications that the FCA could make to its approach, which would ensure the Consumer Duty has the most effective impact going forward.
To hear this (and to subscribe to future episodes in season two of our enforcement mini-series) search for “Ashurst Legal Outlook” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In this episode, we pinpoint the business trends and legal issues that will shape the UK’s construction landscape in 2025. From challenges and risks to opportunities and innovations, our expert panel covers a range of ground.
Insolvency risk. Legislative developments. Labour shortages. Difficulties like these made 2024 a challenging year for many in the UK’s construction sector. So what can we expect in 2025?
In this episode, we tackle a number of topics. Ashurst colleagues Sadia McEvoy, Chris Whitehouse and Matt Pearson discuss the still-unfolding impacts of the Building Safety Act, the warning signs of construction insolvencies, the sector’s bid to meet net-zero targets, how modular construction might address productivity and labour issues, the legislative changes to watch, and the potential upside of more collaborative procurement strategies.
To hear this episode search for “Ashurst Legal Outlook” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Last year, financial services firms were left reeling by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)'s transparency proposals (aka "naming and shaming" firms that are under investigation). Since then, the proposals have been amended by way of a second consultation. In today’s episode, we explain what’s changed, what’s been clarified, and what all this could mean for regulated firms and individuals.
In the latest episode of our continuing mini-series on financial services regulation, we explain the latest developments on the FCA’s controversial proposals on transparency and public announcements during investigations.
Host Nathan Willmott is joined by Ashurst colleagues Eleanor Robinson and Adam Jamieson to summarise what has changed in the draft transparency proposals; the most important being the change to the public interest test (which now states that the FCA must consider the impact on the firm of any announcement as part of the public interest test); and the increased period of notice that firms can expect of publication (from 1 business day to 10) . They also probe some of the case study examples provided by theFCA.
While the FCA anticipates there will be very few cases each year, Adam points out that this policy “might be enforced for decades and [FCA] strategy will change, cases will change, personnel at the FCA will change – all factors that could influence the number of investigations and therefore the impact of this type of policy”. And irrespective of how many firms are affected, Adam adds that “if you are one of the firms who does get named … it’s going to be your business [and reputation] that gets harmed”.
As well as discussing the implications for firms under investigation and what the new case studies do (and don’t) clarify, our expert panel reflects on the political heat this policy has generated and whether that could yet scupper the proposals before they comes into being. Following the current consultation period, the FCA intends to make a decision by the end of March 2025.
To hear this (and to subscribe to future episodes in season two of our enforcement mini-series) search for “Ashurst Legal Outlook” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Explore the pivotal legal challenges and anticipate risk areas that are set to define the UK real estate disputes in 2025, from sustainability mandates to tenant insolvency and landmark legislative changes.
The UK real estate sector is poised for significant legal developments in 2025. Ashurst’s specialist real estate disputes lawyers Alison Hardy, Joe Perry-Courtade, and Debbie Eliad unpack the key legal issues, trends, and cases shaping the industry. From the push for net zero to the latest developments in tenant insolvency, this discussion provides insights to help stakeholders navigate an evolving landscape.
Episode talking points include:
• Net Zero Targets: The growing focus on energy-efficient retrofits and sustainability is driving disputes over stranded assets, demolition vs. retrofitting, and service charges for funding upgrades.
• The Building Safety Act: Key rulings like Triathlon Homes are reshaping landlord and developer obligations, with significant appeals expected in 2025.
• Service Charge Disputes: Cases such as Brewster House highlight the tension between landlord obligations and tenant liabilities for structural defects.
• Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 Consultation: Proposed reforms could dramatically alter security of tenure rights in the commercial leasehold market.
• Telecoms Code Challenges: Disputes over old agreements, leases, and renewal rights remain contentious, with key clarifications needed.
• Tenant Insolvency and Restructuring Plans: The Cineworld case showcases how restructuring plans are impacting landlords and tenants, with valuable lessons for proactive negotiation.
List of cases discussed:
· Triathlon Homes LLP -v- Stratford Village Development Partnership and others [2024] UKFTT 26 (PC)
· Adriatic Land 5 Limited -v- The Long Leaseholders at Hippersley Point [2023] UKUT 271 (LC)
· The London Borough of Tower Hamlets -v- Lessees of Brewster House and Malting House [2024] UKUT 193 (LC)
· AP Wireless -v- On Tower UK Limited [2024] UKUT 263 (LC)
· Gravesham Borough Council -v- On Tower UK Ltd [2024] UKUT 151 (LC)
· UK Commercial Property Finance Holdings Ltd -v- Cine-UK Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 2475 (Ch)
· Responding to the consultation on the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.
To listen and subscribe to this podcast, search for ‘Ashurst Legal Outlook’ on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In this episode, our expert panel weighs up potential changes to the way that the UK's Financial Ombudsman Service resolves customer complaints, with a view to clearing up uncertainty and creating a more consistent framework for firms to follow.
Our panel for this episode includes host Nathan Willmott, his Ashurst colleague Adam Jamieson and special guest Adam Temple, a barrister at 3 Verulam Buildings (3VB). Together, they reflect on the evolution of the Financial Ombudsman Service ,which was set up in 2001 to deal with consumer complaints and secure redress when things go wrong. As Adam Temple points out, two decades later “it is a quite different beast” from what was originally envisaged.
The episode then goes on to unpick some of the challenges that have beset the Ombudsman, the complainants and financial services firms. These include the increased volume of complaints, delays and complexity in the system, the notoriously tricky task of assessing what is “fair and reasonable”, and the difficulties that come with "mass redress events" (like PPI or the current issue of motor finance).
Attention then turns to possible solutions. Our expert panel starts by considering the most drastic option (e.g. dismantling the Financial Ombudsman Service completely) before suggesting more pragmatic improvements such as changing the "fair and reasonable" test that the Ombudsman is required to apply and giving the Financial Conduct Authority more power to intervene where appropriate.
To listen to this and subscribe to future episodes in our enforcement mini-series, search for ‘Ashurst Legal Outlook’ on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In the wake of the government’s recent infrastructure announcements, we pinpoint the legal issues to watch out for in real estate.
The coming year will see widespread activity in the UK’s real estate asset classes, from logistics to the living sector (in its broadest sense), and from data centres to office space. In this episode, we discuss the legal changes, risks and trends to keep on your radar.
Together, Ashurst’s Alison Murrin and Richard Vernon reflect on market sentiment, government plans to deliver 1.5 million homes and fast-track major infrastructure projects, and how key asset classes, legislative developments, and sustainability goals (e.g. energy efficiency, decarbonisation, etc) may evolve.
Episode talking points include:
· Logistics: Demand will be further fuelled by the shift to e-commerce and onshoring production, but hurdles will include site availability and housing pressure on brownfield sites.
· Living sector: Despite government support for build-to-rent schemes and funding initiatives, the UK’s chronic housing undersupply appears set to continue. And challenges such as retrofitting older homes will loom large.
· Data centres: Exponential growth will expose land and power shortages, alongside sustainability challenges, influenced by new EU energy reporting standards.
· Offices: Sustainability will separate prime-grade offices from outdated stock, with retrofitting lagging behind targets to meet net-zero ambitions.
· Legal hot topics: Proposed commonhold reforms, high street revitalisation efforts, biodiversity net gain mandates, the Renters’ Rights Bill abolishment of no-fault evictions, cladding safety, decarbonisation, and more.
To listen and subscribe to this podcast, search for ‘Ashurst Legal Outlook’ on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Season 2 of our regulatory enforcement mini-series kicks off by considering what the 2025 priorities are (and should be) for the UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA).
With a busy year ahead for the PRA and FCA, this episode highlights some of the issues and trends that financial services firms should watch out for. For this episode, host Nathan Willmott is joined by his Ashurst colleague Adam Jamieson and special guest Saima Hanif KC, a barrister at 3 Verulam Buildings (3VB).
Together, they discuss the Upper Tribunal’s packed caseload and the challenges for barristers and individuals seeking to argue these cases, including the impact of certain judges and the FCA's new strategy on disclosure. They also reflect on the FCA’s focus on speeding up investigations and streamlining its portfolio, consider how investigations are prioritised, and question whether or not it’s appropriate for the FCA to have a target for the proportion of investigations closed with no action.
The conversation also tackles the vexed issue of the FCA’s penality-setting framework and what might be learned from the PRA’s approach. And finally, our expert panel flags up other issues that will shape 2025, such as the FCA’s revised proposals for naming and shaming (to be revisited in detail in a future episode), the rules around non-financial misconduct, and the prospect of a first Consumer Duty case.
To listen to this and subscribe to future episodes in our enforcement mini-series, search for ‘Ashurst Legal Outlook’ on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In the seventh and final episode for 2024 of our Industrious Conversations series, Ashurst’s Ian Humphreys and Peter McNulty explain how Closing the Loopholes changes are shifting the enterprise bargaining landscape under the Fair Work Act.
Drawing on insights from Ashurst's soon to be released 2024 Bargaining Trends Survey, Ian and Peter cover key reforms to the bargaining process, including the increased power of unions to initiate bargaining, changes to the Better Off Overall Test (BOOT) and its impact on agreement approvals, and the introduction of the intractable bargaining regime, which allows the Fair Work Commission to intervene in deadlocked negotiations.
This episode also provides strategies for employers to adapt to this complex environment, emphasising the importance of thorough preparation and skilled negotiation.
To hear all episodes in the Industrious Conversations series on Australian industrial relations, subscribe to Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In this episode, we hear from employment lawyers in Australia, Singapore, Indonesia and the UK. Together they describe and compare the industrial relations landscapes in their respective countries – and reflect on what UK employers can learn from these.
Host Crowley Woodford reflects on the potential impacts of the UK’s long-awaited Employment Rights Bill, which is shaping up to be one of the most ambitious reforms to trade union rights since the 1980s. Crowley breaks down some of the main changes which pave the way for greater union involvement, and he pinpoints issues that UK employers should watch out for.
Peter McNulty offers his take on how Australian employers have responded to recent changes to the Fair Work Act, including the process and dynamics of bargaining for agreements. Karen Mitra describes Singapore’s uniquely non-adversial approach to union/employer relationships where strike action is rare, and explains new rights to union representation for gig workers. And Norman Ibnuaji shares perspectives from Indonesia, where unionisation is relatively high among workers and industrial action is more common.
To listen to this and previous epsiodes in our biannual World@Work series, search for ‘Ashurst Legal Outlook’ on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or your favourite podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Ashurst Employment partners Stephen Woodbury and Tamara Lutvey discuss the expanded single-interest employer authorisation bargaining stream, also known as multi-employer bargaining.
Together, they explain how Fair Work Act amendments have broadened the criteria for multi-employer enterprise agreements, and they explain why uptake by unions has so far been low. The conversation delves into the Fair Work Commission's (FWC) criteria, such as ensuring a common interest among employers and the prohibition of coerced agreements, pointing to a recent case in the coal industry to illustrate how the FWC assesses these factors.
They also discuss the "rebuttable presumption" for larger employers, where the FWC assumes common interest unless proven otherwise. Lastly, they pinpoint challenges and defensive strategies employers can use to avoid involuntary inclusion in multi-employer authorisations (known as "roping in"), which could force employers into agreements without direct negotiation input.
To hear further episodes in our Industrious Conversations series on Australian industrial relations, subscribe to Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In the fifth episode of our Industrious Conversations series, Ashurst’s Jane Harvey and Elissa Speight explain how Closing The Loophole changes are strengthening protections for workers who are not employees, and extending the scope of the Fair Work Commission to intervene in workforce matters.
As Jane and Elissa point out, the reforms impact independent contractor arrangements in several ways. Their conversation highlights changes relating to the classification of a worker as an employee or contractor, the introduction of a new unfair contract terms jurisdiction, and changes to the defences available where a sham contracting claim is made.
Jane and Elissa also outline how the changes may impact employers and suggest several practical ways employers can respond to these changes. This includes thoroughly reviewing contractor engagements, updating contract templates, training managers to mitigate the risk of misclassification under the new framework, and more.
To hear further episodes in Industrious Conversations, our series on Australian industrial relations, subscribe to Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Following Ashurst’s recent conference, three experts regroup to pick out the most pressing trends and risks stemming from class actions in the UK.
Jon Gale, partner at Ashurst’s Dispute Resolution practice in London, is joined by colleagues Tim West and Sarah-Jane Dobson to reflect on the highlights from the firm's recent class actions conference. Together, they discuss the evolving landscape of class actions including litigation funding, competition claims, and more.
The conference showcased an array of experts including clients, claimant law firms, barristers, and funders. One highlight was the keynote speech from Mr Justice Robin Knowles CBE, who stressed the essential role of class actions in the legal system and the permanence of commercial funding in such claims.
In the podcast, Tim stresses the importance of understanding class actions from a client’s perspective, emphasising that these cases (and the associated risks) often attract C-suite attention. He also discusses the rising prevalance of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) concerns, with potential class actions arising from the gaps between corporate promises and practices.
Sarah-Jane discusses the varied treatment of class actions across sectors, particularly in competition and product liability cases. She anticipates a further rise in class actions, especially in sectors like life sciences and consumer protection.
The trio also explore litigation funding, discussing the significance of external financial backing for large class actions and the impact of the Supreme Court’s recent PACCAR ruling on funding structures.
To hear more episodes on class actions and a range of other subjects, subscribe to Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In this, the fourth instalment of Industrious Conversations, Ashurst’s Jennie Mansfield and Jon Lovell detail the impact of Australia’s "Closing the Loophole" industrial relations changes on corporate transactions, offering critical insights into the practical impact of these developments.
The discussion centres on the commercial challenges introduced by these changes, particularly in relation to due diligence processes, labour hire, casual employment, and independent contractor arrangements. Jennie and Jon explain how these reforms affect deal-making and due diligence, where uncertainty around labour costs and employment models can complicate transactions. They also stress the importance of assessing a company's governance and systems for managing compliance, highlighting the risks of non-compliance and the significant penalties that may arise. Jon notes, "If compliance issues are identified, it's essential to have a clear program and strategy in place for remedying the non-compliance within a reasonable period following completion."
To hear more episodes in Industrious Conversations, our series on Australian industrial relations, subscribe to Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In the third episode of Industrious Conversations, Ashurst's Talia Firth and Scarlet Reid explain some notable changes to casual employment that stem from recent amendments to the Fair Work Act. These changes include the new definition of a "casual employee" under Section 15A of the Act, new requirements to issue a Casual Employment Information Statement (CEIS) during an employee's employment, and the new casual conversion provisions under the National Employment Standards.
Together, Talia and Scarlet explain how and why these changes came into being, and they discuss some of the subtleties that employers need to be aware of, including some upcoming milestones and deadlines. In conclusion, Scarlet emphasises: "Employers should make sure they understand the new definition of 'casual employee' and should carefully consider whether their casual arrangements meet this definition. Employers should also make sure that they have processes in place to make sure that casual employees receive the CEIS at the right times. And finally, employers need to be prepared to respond to notifications from casuals to change to permanent employment once the new employee choice pathway comes into play from 26 February 2025."
To hear more episodes in our Industrious Conversations series on Australian industrial relations, subscribe to Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Ashurst’s Yann Alix is joined by Moroccan lawyer Gahlia Mokhtari and Brazilian lawyer Ana Carolina Calil to discuss the evolving hydrogen strategies, regulations, incentives, and major projects taking place in their respective countries.
With Brazil’s government getting behind hydrogen, Ana explains new legislation regulating the main guidelines on low carbon and green hydrogen public policy. She highlights opportunities for foreign investors including tax incentives, R&D activity and a solid legal framework – not to mention a sophisticated and attractive energy transmission market. She also flags some challenges to watch out for, including capex, technology and litigation risks.
Meanwhile, Ghalia zooms in on Morocco, which is seeking to become a regional hub for green hydrogen through substantial investments in renewable energy sources, notably solar and wind, to achieve energy independence. Ghalia describes Morocco’s evolving regulatory landscape and foreign investment incentives, as well as potential barriers and challenges.
To view Ashurst’s interactive global guide to investing in hydrogen, follow this link. You can subscribe and listen to more episodes of Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
In the second episode of Industrious Conversations, Employment Partners Julia Sutherland and James Hall discuss strategies for managing protected action ballot orders (PABOs) and protected industrial action (PIA) arising from recent amendments under the Secure Jobs, Better Pay Act.
"We're seeing that even though the legal changes are relatively minor, the practical implications for employers navigating industrial action are significant," notes James Hall during the episode.
Key discussion points include: The introduction of section 448A conferences, where bargaining representatives must attend a Fair Work Commission meeting before voting on PABOs. Insights into early cases involving multi-employer agreements and PABOs. How employers can navigate the PABO process strategically and the importance of preparation.For more insights into key developments in Australian industrial relations, subscribe to Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Imagine living in a country that offers you stunning landscapes, rich culture, delicious cuisine, and a generous tax regime. Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it? Well, not if you choose Italy as your destination.
Should a high-net-worth individual consider moving to Italy for tax reasons? How do the nation’s Flat Tax regime and Impatriate regime work? And why might company taxpayers also consider Italy? All these questions, and more, are answered in this episode of the Tax Lyrical podcast mini-series.
To evaluate the Italian tax regime, Ashurst’s Sophie Lloyd is joined by colleagues Michele Milanese and Federico Nobili. Together the three of them discuss the benefits, incentives and complications of investing in Italy, as well as the steps required to make your finances flourish. “Our advice is to have a clear understanding of the Italian tax law and the legal tools available to taxpayers,” emphasises Michele.
This is the latest episode in our mini-series of episodes tackling tax issues and investment funds. To listen to this episode and subscribe to future episodes, search for “Ashurst Legal Outlook” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
"We're all learning... new acronyms, new exceptions, how to apply these laws," remarks Employment Partner, Trent Sebbens in this debut episode of the team’s Industrious Conversations series. Trent and Employment partner Kathy Srdanovic delve into one of the most significant changes introduced by the Closing Loopholes reforms: Regulated Labour Hire Arrangement Orders (RLHAOs).
This new regime, part of the Fair Work Act, requires that labour hire workers are paid a Protected Rate of Pay (PROP), aligning their wages with those of directly employed workers. The reforms have already triggered considerable activity, particularly in industries like mining, transport and aviation.
In this episode you will hear expert guidance on:
The key criteria for the making of a Regulated Labour Hire Arrangement Order Exceptions where services, not labour, are provided Early test cases setting the tone for future rulings.To explore key developments in industrial relations in Australia, and to gain insights from other members of the Employment team, subscribe to Ashurst Legal Outlook on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform.
The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
- Daha fazla göster
