Author: Ben Ashworth

It would seem that even being a supplier to the London 2012 Olympics is not enough to stem the trading difficulties besetting the construction industry.

Parry Bowen, a Staffordshire based business specialising in high quality, state-of-the-art glass facades, had won the contract to fit curtain walling and glazing at the London 2012 Olympics’ Stratford base. Due to the anaemic condition of the construction market however, Parry Bowen now look set to enter administration next week with Irwin & Company appointed as administrators.

The loss of such a high-profile supplier will be unwelcome for the organisers of London 2012, for whom a seeming unrelenting run of bad-news stories over costs, logistics, image and legacy have already served to tarnish The Games, perhaps irreparably.

Those in the construction industry will also be shaken by this news, for Parry Bowen was far from a failing business. It is reported how only two years ago, the business had substantial cash reserves, which have now been eaten away by the significant drop off in trade and the inability of its customers to pay. Through their involvement in projects such as Salford Quays and the Emirates Stadium, Parry Bowen enjoyed a unique reputation in its industry and was widely credited for its innovation in glazing and technical expertise.

If trading from such a position of strength still cannot guarantee survival in the Construction Industry in these turbulent times, the question now on the lips of its participants is what can?

Ben Ashworth is a Commercial Dispute Resolution Solicitor specialising in Debt Recovery.

Related Articles:
Q&A on recovery of unpaid invoices
Four ways to avoid debt problems

Author: John Moore

Last year the British Council of Shopping Centres Conference was in November. In Manchester. It wasn’t a good combination for southern retail experts (however intrepid) and more than one pair of shoes still bear the scars of our trip.

This year the Conference was still in Manchester but had wisely been moved forward a couple of months to mid September which suited everyone better: no need to get drenched going to the Conference Centre; no need to freeze getting to the pubs afterwards. Our attendees were John Moore, Terence Ritchie, David Linklater and Jacqui Button and between us all we managed to speak to (and have drinks with!) a large number of retailers, developers and agents.

The mood of the Conference was muted. One major retailer we spoke to is concerned about the lack of new shopping centres. As a new development can take over a decade to complete they are worried that it will be difficult for successful businesses to grow to their full potential in the short to medium term. Other retailers commented on the difficult trading times and are looking to dispose of, rather than acquire, stores. Still others are looking to expand but, as smaller operators, find the terms offered by Landlords are impossible to meet.

In these tricky times it was inevitable that there would be few of the lavish parties which graced the Conferences of old but pubs and restaurants in the city were busy, in particular the bar of the Midland Hotel was standing room only throughout the Conference and the Starbucks next to the Conference Centre was full to the brim with coffee drinkers typing away on their iPad’s and Blackberries.

Next year the Conference will be in Liverpool. We’re already looking forward to it and hoping that by the time it comes round the retail outlook will be much brighter.

John Moore is a Commercial Property Partner at SA Law, he advises on all aspects of commercial and residential property, with particular expertise in the fields of asset management, acquisition and finance.

Contact Us
For further information or to discuss a particular matter or situation in more detail, contact John Moore at our St Albans office by email at john.moore@salaw.com or on 01727 798074.

Author: Clare MacKay

Independent schools breathed a collective sigh of relief on 14 October 2011 as their charitable status (and the associated tax advantages that this confers) was preserved.

The ruling of the Charities Tribunal decided that it was for the trustees of independent schools to decide how they justify their charitable status and not the Charity Commission. The ruling means that independent schools are not required to offer bursaries to children from less affluent backgrounds in order to retain their charitable status. Instead they must continue to provide a public benefit and the trustees of each school have a discretion as to how they do this. Simply providing education in a private setting is not enough. Independent schools must reach out in a way that is not “minimal or tokenistic” to families who would otherwise be unable to afford to educate their children privately. Exactly what they need to do to demonstrate such a public benefit is an open ended question and is likely to be open to further challenge.

Despite the Independent Schools Council claiming a victory, the Charity Commission regards this ruling as a draw. It has been ordered to rewrite its guidance to all fee charging charities. The implications of this decision therefore extend beyond independent schools to all charities who charge fees, such as care homes. All such charities will now have to demonstrate that they provide a wider public benefit to retain their charitable status going forward.

If you would like more information or advice relating to a specific matter, please do not hesitate to contact Clare Mackay on 01727 798084 or by email at clare.mackay@salaw.com or any member of the Commercial Dispute Resolution team.

© SA LAW 2011
Every care is taken in the preparation of our articles. However, no responsibility can be accepted to any person who acts on the basis of information contained in them. You are recommended to obtain specific advice in respect of individual cases.

Author: Nathanael Young

Hot on the heels of the Advocate General’s opinion on the use of foreign decoders (well, 8 months later) the Court of Justice has now given its ruling on the issue. As expected, the Advocate General’s opinion has been followed, and prohibitions on using or selling foreign decoder cards have been held contrary to European law.

Although the judgment runs to 212 paragraphs, it has already been scrutinised and re-scrutinised across the EU. This is because, as mentioned in my previous blog piece, it strikes at the heart of the current licensing system used for football in the UK and elsewhere.

In principle, the Court held that national legislation which prohibits the import, sale or use of foreign decoder cards is contrary to the freedom to provide services. It also held that a system of exclusive licences is itself contrary to competition law if the licences prohibit the supply of decoder cards to television viewers outside the licensee’s territory.

However, in an odd quirk, the Court also held that the opening video sequence, the Premier League anthem, pre-recorded films showing highlights of recent Premier League matches and certain other graphics fell into a separate category. These works could only be used with authorisation from the rights holder.

Although pub owners can protect themselves from this exception by only screening games from kick off, rights holders are no doubt looking at whether they can use this additional material in an effort to preserve the status quo. However, given the fundamental antagonism in the judgment towards the notion of partitioning rights, and towards artificial price differentials resulting from such partitioning, this may be hard to achieve.

Whilst broadcasters and rights holders will be disappointed at the decision, it was hardly unexpected after the Advocate General’s opinion. They must therefore have given some thought to contingency plans, and to new business models to cover just this eventuality. Whether these will involve the pan-European licences the Advocate General seemed to envisage is another question. So too is the issue that has the widest interest – the effect of such new models on football itself.

The importance of this decision on football has resulted in considerable media attention already, with much speculation as to whether the result will be business as usual or fundamental change. However, the case is worth noting for other reasons as well. Apart from anything else, it is a vivid illustration of how the importance of a single market and competition across member states is hard-wired into European law. Intellectual property rights have not proved sacrosanct when they have come into conflict with competition law, as even Microsoft has found to its cost.

Author: Alexis Asher

George Osborne has today announced two forthcoming changes to Employment Law and, in particular, Employment Tribunal practice and procedure.

From 1 April 2012, the qualifying period after which an employee will be eligible to bring a claim of unfair dismissal, will be increased from one year to two years.

There is also the proposal to introduce fees for Tribunal claims. At the time of writing, details have not been fully confirmed. However, the initial information available suggests that claimants will be charged a fee of £250 when issuing their claim, and a further £1,000 when their claim is listed for hearing.

There is further speculation on the fee structure, including the possibility of higher fees where the claim is for a sum over £30,000 and a potential waiving of fees where a claimant can demonstrate they do not have the ability to pay. As yet, it is not clear how an individual’s means to pay will be assessed. There is a suggestion that fees will be refunded to a successful claimant, but lost if they do not succeed in their claim.

The Government’s aim is to reduce the number of claims made to the Employment Tribunal, and boost the economy by encouraging employers to recruit more freely without the fear of claims. It remains to be seen whether the changes will achieve this aim.

We will be keeping you updated with developments and opinion over the coming days.

Contact Us
For further information or to discuss a particular matter or situation in more detail, contact Alexis Asher at our St Albans office by email at alexis.asher@salaw.com or on 01727 798023.

© SA LAW 2011
Every care is taken in the preparation of our articles. However, no responsibility can be accepted to any person who acts on the basis of information contained in them. You are recommended to obtain specific advice in respect of individual cases.