Loading...

Follow The Lexoo Blog | The smartest way to find a great .. on Feedspot

Continue with Google
Continue with Facebook
or

Valid

As we all know, Brexit is coming and it is important to understand how it will affect commercial contracts and their governing law. Little is actually known about the impact of Brexit and the legal terms of this separation. This creates uncertainty and the following concepts within commercial contracts may need to be reviewed or amended.

Governing law

There is no reason to believe that Brexit will have a significant effect on the chosen governing law of commercial contracts. However, possible conflicts that may arise from choosing English law as the governing law of a contract could be due to terminology (e.g. the definition of “territory” may or may not include the UK as EU territory), from determining the enforceability of an English court decision in the EU Member State courts, or from applying English proceedings in the EU courts.

Solution: To avoid enforceability issues in the EU, parties should agree in writing to the exclusive jurisdiction of English courts or the use of arbitration to resolve disputes.

Meaning of contractual terms and/or clauses

As mentioned, differences in the interpretation of certain clauses in existing contracts may arise. For example, “EU Legislation” may include English Law or instead refer to EU legislation that will no longer be applicable in the UK. Similarly, references to “EU standards” or “UK standards” may be subject to different interpretations, causing unnecessary controversy between the parties.

Solution: Existing contracts should be reviewed for similar contradictions to avoid future misunderstandings between parties.

Currency exchange rates and purchase price

Because of this period of uncertainty where the UK has not actually left the EU, there might be fluctuations in the Pounds Sterling to Euro exchange rate, and there is no way of actually knowing how Brexit will impact both economies. This could affect the pricing of existing contracts, particularly in instances where parties did not take into account potential exchange rate fluctuations post-Brexit when entering into the contract (for example, due to changes in tariff rates for trade or VAT increaments).

Solution: New contracts should prevent confusion around this topic by protecting against excessive exchange rate fluctuations and determining which party will bear any fluctuation risk. For existing contracts, parties should consider whether any changes need to be made to the purchase price or currency denomination.

Force Majeure

Many questioned if Brexit may trigger force majeure or material adverse change (“MAC”) clauses in existing contracts. There might be a substantive argument depending on what is written in the actual contract, where theories like frustration (ability to perform the contract due to economic or employment issues) can be applied and enforced by a court. It is possible that these clauses become grounds for termination, however it will always depend in their interpretation by the judge.

Solution: It’s important to review these clauses and determine if a conflict between the parties and/or in the performance of the contract could arise, so when the UK effectively leaves the EU these are excluded or expressly included.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
GC secrets Managing a dispersed legal team

How do you lead across multiple countries and multiple time zones? Sterling Miller, GC of Marketo, discusses what you need to do to manage a dispersed legal team in this edition of Ten Things.

-- The true cost of interruptions for lawyers

Clio’s 2017 Legal Trends Report found that 30% of legal professionals are interrupted between six and 10 times per day. Factoring in the time it takes to get back on track, that’s almost four hours a day lost to distractions. Here are tips for handling interruptions better and increasing your productivity.

-- How not to earn a seat at the table

GCs including Eric Dale, Chief Legal Officer of Nielsen, and Roy Adams, GC of Wealthfront, share their insight into why lawyers fail to be viewed as strategic advisors.

Tomorrow’s lawyers Legaltech is just part of the job

Lexoo CEO Daniel van Binsbergen speaks to Briefing Magazine (see page 12) about alternative career paths in law, the opportunities available for junior lawyers and the need for lawyers to overcome their aversion to tech.

“It would therefore be good to teach junior lawyers early on that navigating legaltech software is simply part of their jobs, isn’t scary, and that staying up to date with new innovations will help them to get ahead.”

-- Trust is what separates us from the machines

Paul Rawlinson, Global Chair of Baker McKenzie, presents an optimistic future for lawyers in this World Economic Forum piece. Tech is changing the legal industry, he argues, but the human desire to speak to a trusted human won’t change, and so we should continue the investment in talent.

-- Legal design A privacy policy you don’t need a law degree to read

Richard Mabey, CEO of Juro, a contract management platform, explains how they redesigned their privacy policy following a multidisciplinary design sprint with multiple iterations, rapid prototyping and user testing. The end product is a human-centric privacy policy that people actually want to read.

-- Legal ops A call to arms for legal operations leaders

Following a successful 2018 Corporate Legal Operations Consortium (CLOC) Conference, Mary O'Carroll, Head of Legal Operations at Google and member of CLOC delivers her closing remarks by summarising the progress made so far and highlighting the key barriers to change.

“As legal operations leaders, the game is now about the right sourcing. It’s about designing and optimizing global value chains. How do we find the very best provider for that piece of work? How do we make sure we have the right resource lined up to the right need? And - most of all - how do we find ways to make the whole value chain work better and more seamlessly?”

-- Starbucks’ legal spend assessment

Lisa Kremer Brown, MD of Operations & Strategy, Law and Corporate Affairs at Starbucks, discusses data, processes, and the steps she took to carry out a thorough legal spend assessment in order to guide negotiations on external counsel spend.

Lawyer stories Lawyering from Verbier

Given latest technological developments and the rise of the gig economy, remote working is now a real possibility for lawyers. Lexoo lawyer Gretchen Lennon speaks to The Telegraph about how joining the Lexoo platform has given her the freedom to work from anywhere in the world.

“On a perfect day, Lennon skis for a couple of hours in the morning then sits down at her desk by 11am, when it's still only 10am in the UK. In the summer, she swaps her skis for hiking boots or a mountain bike.”

Inspired by Gretchen? Join us.

-- Lexoo How we can help you

An FT Innovative Lawyers Awards 2017 winner, we have helped GCs across all sectors including tech, media, telecoms, renewable energy, oil and gas, finance, real estate and retail to vastly reduce their legal spend by building effective, long-lasting relationships with high-quality boutique firms around the world.

Here’s how we can help you:

  • Standalone projects - our global marketplace is a genuine alternative to international law firms for standalone projects or cross border deals.
  • External legal team - we can match you with quality outside counsel working on a low overhead basis to provide an ongoing service at pre-agreed rates (e.g. 5-10 hours of support spread out over the week).
  • Interim lawyers and on/off-site placements - we can help you find interim solutions to manage temporary absences or give your team a short-term boost.

Want to learn more about Lexoo? Click here to request a demo.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

Lexoo's CEO Daniel van Binsbergen was recently asked by a friend whether a trade mark could be registered without a lawyer, and what the risks are for doing so. Daniel passed the question on to me, and here's my response:

A trade mark attorney is not just there to file trade mark applications. They are important business advisers who help a company navigate through all kinds of issues with the use and registration of their branding. Without taking the advice of a trade mark attorney any business can get into very serious trouble very quickly. I spend most of my time as a trade mark attorney helping businesses with these issues, either pre-emptively avoiding them, or helping to resolve them.

The process of choosing and then registering a trade mark is beset with potential risks, and the advice that a trade mark attorney will provide to mitigate or avoid those risks is crucial. I have seen numerous cases which involve someone having filed a trade mark application and then having become embroiled in a legal dispute with an earlier rights holder, or which involve someone using a trade mark only to find themselves on the receiving end of a trade mark infringement action.

When a client comes to me asking me to file a trade mark application, I don’t just do what they ask. I will first consider the inherent registerability of the proposed brand, and then perform some searching to try to assess the likelihood of an issue with an existing rights holder, both in terms of them trying to prevent the mark being registered, and suing for infringement of their rights. In 99% of cases there are earlier rights to consider, and risks to asses. The client is then in a position to make an informed decision about how to proceed. Quite often they end up changing their proposed branding to avoid issues.

Anyone who just chooses a new brand name in a vacuum, and then begins using it and/or just files their own trade mark application for it is asking for trouble. And the trouble they can get themselves into can be very serious.

On top of these general commercial considerations, when it comes to the application itself while it might appear simple it can be far from it. Firstly, there is the question of what to apply to register. A trade mark can be registered in all kinds of different ways, with advantages and disadvantages to each approach. Would an unrepresented applicant know the difference between a word-only application and a device mark application for instance? I have seen countless applications filed by unrepresented applicants which gave them completely the wrong rights. Secondly, there are the goods and services to cover. This element of a trade mark application is nowhere near as simple as it seems. If someone wants to use a brand to just sell shoes, then the process is fairly obvious. However, the existing classification system is very awkward to use when someone wants to launch a business which involves an app, an online platform, some retailing and some business services. You need to be very experienced with the classification system to know how best to properly cover all that. I have also lost count of the number of times I have been asked to help someone who has already filed an application with all the wrong goods and services in it. There are some very easy mistakes you can make.

If there are any issues with the application, such as an examiner objection or a third party opposition, then the work required to deal with that is far beyond the layman. This is what a trade mark attorney is qualified to handle, and a good one will be able to resolve the matter for their client quickly and efficiently. This is not just a directly legal area, as a lot of the time it also involves striking settlement deals with earlier rights holders. Only an experienced attorney will know what kind of thing will work, and how to get their client the best result. There is a lot of bravado from earlier rights holders, and it can be daunting to deal with without an experienced representative.

Over and above all this, I also spend a lot of my time managing the trade mark portfolios of my clients, and acting as the central hub for overseas applications. Some of our clients have hundreds of foreign registrations, all of which were obtained via ourselves or via our international network of associate agents. This network has taken decades to establish, and the working relationships with have with our foreign agents is very beneficial for our clients.

In addition, a trade mark attorney will also handle enforcement of rights, and deal with infringement threats. How would someone who had filed their trade mark application themselves prepare and send a cease and desist letter for instance, or approach a trade mark applicant to demand that their conflicting application be withdrawn or amended? How would they deal with a letter sent to them threatening them with infringement action? These are all things which the trade mark attorney will deal with.

A trade mark attorney can also handle assignments of rights, and help to negotiate and establish trade mark licences. They also handle renewals of rights, and deal with notices issued by IP offices.

I have one final thought for those considering proceeding on their own, and that is the value of having the trade mark attorney listed on the trade marks register as the appointed representative. This is actually very important because it acts as a warning to others that the trade mark owner needs to be taken seriously. It is a rather unfortunate fact that when I am looking at earlier rights for my clients, whenever I come across one where there is no appointed representative I tend to advise my clients that they can ignore it, because the owner does not need to be taken seriously. After all, if they can’t afford an attorney, or decided not to use one, then they are not going to be able to afford to oppose a new application, or know how to do so. I wonder whether people who file their own applications are even aware that their rights are generally given little consideration by others, and therefore it is far more likely that others will seek similar rights and cause them all kinds of problems.

Therefore, the idea that a trade mark attorney just fills in trade mark application forms, and is therefore of little practical use is completely wrong. The work they do is vital to the success of any organisation, and I can guarantee you that no major successful business does not use one. There is a reason why the UK’s Chartered Patent Attorneys and Chartered Trade Mark Attorneys collectively contribute over a billion pounds each year to the UK economy. The services they provide are highly sought-after and valued.

Jerry Bridge-Butler is a UK Chartered Patent Attorney and a European Patent Attorney, as well as a UK and European Trade Mark Attorney. His trademark work includes prosecuting applications in the UK and Europe, and protecting the trademark portfolios of a number of well known brands.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
Lexoo lately

In Q1 2018, we launched in South Korea, Sierra Leone, Oman, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Bermuda, Gibraltar, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Ukraine.

We’re now in 44 countries. There are currently only two law firms in the world with a bigger international footprint!

Here’s how we can help you:

  • Standalone projects - our global marketplace is a genuine alternative to international law firms for standalone projects or cross border deals.
  • External legal team - we can match you with quality outside counsel working on a low overhead basis to provide an ongoing service at pre-agreed rates (e.g. 5-10 hours of support spread out over the week).
  • Interim lawyers and on/off-site placements - we can help you find interim solutions to manage temporary absences or give your team a short-term boost.

Want to learn more about Lexoo? Click here to request a demo.

GC secrets GCs: an untapped resource

The GC is one of the most untapped resources in a company. Keith Krasny, an ex-MoFo and Expedia lawyer turned executive coach, gives 3 reasons why CEOs should be encouraging their General Counsel to develop as business leaders.

-- Zoopla GC’s predictions for in-house legal

Ned Staple, GC and Company Secretary of ZPG plc (an LSE-listed company that owns and operates platforms like Zoopla and USwitch) considers the big issues on the horizon for in-house lawyers. On new, disruptive providers:

Legal service providers are constantly changing. Short-term interim staffing solutions are now much more attractive, having grown in breadth and depth of expertise in recent years – that trend is likely to continue. With the right business case, and at the right time and place, those providers can certainly be the best choice.

-- The rise (and fall?) of in-house counsel

Hugh A. Simons, former CFO at The Boston Consulting Group and former COO at Ropes & Gray, asks: "Do companies no longer look at in-house lawyers as a way to save money on outside counsel but instead look at the legal department as a cost to be minimized through outsourcing?”

He finds that the simultaneous displacement of work from in-house lawyers to outsourced service providers, and from Big Law to in-house lawyers, has implications for all.

Legal tech Why smart contracts won’t kill off lawyers

Ed Sohn of Thomson Reuters Legal Managed Services explores whether the practice of law will be reduced or eliminated by smart contracts (answer: perhaps, in certain areas), and how lawyers can equip themselves for the tech future.

-- Avoid ‘demo coma’

Legal teams are inundated with flashy new products that promise to revolutionise their work, but as Craig McKeown, specialist in Forensic and Legal Technology at PwC notes, it’s “all too easy to end up with ‘demo coma’, whereby every new offering seems better than the one before”. You can see through the fog and select the right tech product for your legal team by asking these three questions.

-- How AI is changing contracts

Harvard Business Review covers how the use of AI contracting software can improve contracts in three ways: by changing the tools firms use to contract, influencing the content of contracts, and affecting the processes by which firms contract.

Lawyer stories Lessons from Uber’s Head of Global Legal Operations

Mateo Sanchez, Head of Global Legal Operations at Uber talks to Priori Legal about all things legal ops, including the three tools that legal departments of all sizes should consider using.

-- DHL GC on performance management

Mark Smolik, GC and Chief Compliance Officer with DHL Supply Chain of Americas, created his own external law firm performance management system, enabling improvements to his department’s contribution to the company overall. Here’s part 1 and part 2.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

As the UK will leave the European Union on the 29th March 2019, the implications of Brexit on trade marks are still uncertain. Today, businesses can register either a national trade mark in the various countries where they plan to distribute their goods or services, or they can apply for a European Union Trade Mark (EUTM) which covers all 28 Member States. Both types of trade mark are independent and subject to distinct sets of rules.

Consequences of Brexit on UK trade marks National trade mark laws are harmonised under EU Directives

UK trade mark law results from the transposition of the Trade Mark Directive. This directive has been repealed by the Recast Directive in 2015 and Member States have to transpose it into their national law before the 15 January 2019. As the UK will still be a Member State at that date, a new Act should be passed to implement it.

While it seems to be a lot of efforts to pass a new Act to comply with EU law for only 3 months before the UK leaves the EU, it should be noted that a transition period is being discussed, during which EU law would continue to be binding in the UK. That period may last at least until the 31 December 2020. It is then likely that the UK will pass a new Act to comply with the Recast Directive for more than 3 months.

The European exhaustion principle applies to UK trade marks

Furthermore, once the UK will leave the EU and if it does not join the European Economic Area (EEA), the principle of exhaustion as imposed by EU law will cease to apply in the UK. According to this principle, further sales of goods which have been placed on the EEA market by the trade mark owner or with its consent cannot be prevented anywhere on that territory as the IP right is exhausted. The European Commission suggests that IP rights exhausted in the European Union before the withdrawal date should remain exhausted after Brexit in both the EU territory and in the UK territory. In other words, further sales of goods already on the European market on the withdrawal day will not infringe the trade mark registered in the UK, even after Brexit.

The main question is about UK goods placed on the market after the withdrawal date. Before the European exhaustion was imposed by EU law, the international exhaustion principle was applied in the UK. This meant that as soon as the goods were made available anywhere in the world by the trade mark owners or with their consent, they were not able to prevent their resale in any other country where international exhaustion applied. It is then likely that the UK would return to that scheme. However, the UK could also choose a national exhaustion system (once the product is placed on the national market, the right to prevent resale is only exhausted in the national territory) which is much more protective for IP rights owners.

Consequences of Brexit on European Union Trade Marks (EUTMs) Territorial scope of EUTMs

Once the UK leaves the EU, the EUTMs will cease to have effect in the UK. It has been evoked that EUTMs could remain enforceable in the UK if the system would become a European system rather than an EU one, as this would allow the UK to remain part of it while leaving the EU. However, that solution seems unlikely.

Rather, the European Commission has recommended that holders of such rights “should be recognised as holder of an enforceable IP right in relation to the United Kingdom territory, comparable to the right provided by Union law”. The solution would thus be that a EUTM would create a new UK trade mark to cover the UK territory. As the Commission suggests that this should not result in financial costs and that any related administrative burden should be kept to a strict minimum, an automatic registration to turn EU TMs into UK TMs or an opt-in system could be imagined. Those newly created UK rights should maintain the same registration date as the EUTMs.

Validity of EUTMs

A EUTM may be revoked when it has not been genuinely used within the 5 years following registration. Today, a genuine use in one Member State is sufficient to satisfy this requirement. Therefore, a EUTM which is only used in the UK may be considered as genuinely used in the EU. Brexit raises the question of what will happen to EUTMs which were used mainly in the UK: Could EUTMs be revoked as they no longer satisfy the requirement of “genuine use” in what is left of the European Union?

Licensing of EUTMs

Issues also arise when a EUTM licence includes the UK. On the one hand, licence agreements which explicitly cover the use of an EUTM in the UK will need to be revised. On the other hand, when the licence covers the « European Union », the question is whether this will be interpreted as meaning all the Member States at the time the agreement was signed, or at the time the contact is being interpreted. It would then be prudent to review all licences relating to EUTMs

Uncertainty prevails

It is still difficult to assess the full impact that Brexit will have on the protection and enforcement of trade mark rights in the United Kingdom and many questions remain unanswered.

However, the IPO recalls that the UK is also a member of the Madrid system, which is an international trade mark system. This system allows to file one application
and pay one set of fees to apply for protection in up to 116 territories, including the EU.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

The legal implications of Brexit, like all of the implications of Brexit, seem either to be (i) total catastrophe and (ii) business as usual +/- 5% change. We can all hope for the latter, but in 40 years of policy and lawmaking, there are few areas of commercial endeavour that have not been touched by our relations with Brussels and so far there is no real clarity on what the legal implications are. The biggest implication, therefore, is uncertainty which should create opportunity for lawyers and clients alike.

If the job of an entrepreneur is to make money from solving problems, then the commercial lawyer's job is to solve the problems for the problem solvers. There will be plenty of work for everyone solving the problems that come out of Brexit which should be good news, unless the economic damage is so great that the economy disappears completely. If that happens, then the legal implications will be secondary to everything else.

In reality, there must be some economic destruction as a result of Britain's exit from the Eurozone, and there are certainly plenty of laws to re-write, but the optimist in me sees the destruction constrained to badly or structurally vulnerable businesses (Carrilion for example). For example, most financiers that I have spoken to see moving the infrastructure of a large institution as a 10 year project requiring huge time, investment and commitment. (How much commitment it takes to move from Mayfair to Luxembourg remains to be seen). In short, there are almost no fields of legal practise that will not be implicated if not impacted by Brexit. Change that doesn't kill the economy is generally stimulating, and even a heavy Brexit-lead pruning of UK business will leave space for vigorous fresh growth.

For every negative and depressing idea about Brexit, there seems to be a positive alternative. For example, European investment into the VCs who are reliant on the funding will dry up, but the pound is 30% cheaper than it was, banks in the eurozone are charging their clients to hold deposits and some institutions are lending in euros at 0.5% interest rates fixed for long periods. So there should be private money available to replace the centralised capital if it can be convinced to venture into the venture capital world.

From a legal perspective, we just don't know what the changes will be, but the indications from the government for post Brexit regulation is to make the UK more robust rather than less around the key European legal talking points of anti-money laundering, know your customer and general data protection checks. In the absence of better information, we should assume that the post Brexit regulatory environment in the UK will be intended to be business friendly, but to offer an extremely high level of security both of personal data, and a robust defence against using the UK as a destination for illicit financial activity.

As a result, and in the absence of clarity, the best thing any business can do is to keep on with its compliance preparations as they will provide the strongest point to jump off from into a new compliance regime if it comes. The worst thing to do in an environment of uncertainty, is nothing at all.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

The impact of our post-Brexit trading relationship between the UK and the EU has created the biggest challenge to employers in over half a century. Uncertainty not only impacts EU citizens working in the UK but also UK citizens working in the EU.

Although the government has not agreed to a clear road ahead regarding our trading relationship with the EU, the leadership has negotiated some terms bringing some comfort to an anxious society. But as with other major disruptions, employers must effectively manage their processes to ensure they are not caught off guard and left with employment challenges that will have an impact on their daily business.

Before businesses, especially employers dependent on current EU employment, make drastic decisions, you must first assess the true impact of Brexit on your workforce and business. With so much noise over Brexit it is not uncommon for information to be misread or even entirely misrepresented. Therefore businesses need to understand the changes directly affecting their workforce. To avoid the potential of loss talent, I present five areas to address:

  1. Audit your workforce
  • There is a good chance that your workforce may be unaffected if proper procedures are taken to apply for settled status. We suggest performing an audit to determine the status of your workforce (supported by documentation) and ensure that these records are current and up-to-date.
  • Identify all skills gaps in your business along with staff shortages that will be presented after Brexit.
  • Create a management plan to address these skills gaps and staff shortages. This will enable you to see if an internal solution is available or if relocation needs to be an option.
  1. Communicate with your staff
  • By speaking with your workforce you can educate them effectively on the changes caused by Brexit, potentially avoiding misunderstandings and rash decision making. Misinformed decisions can affect contract renewals, work performance and relocation. In addition, the reassurance that their employer is reviewing potential solutions with regards to Brexit may make employees feel more confident about working for your business in such sensitive times and beyond.
  1. Offer assistance
  • Offer your current workforce advice and/or financial assistance with the application process. This can go a long way to gaining the trust and commitment from your employees.
  1. Become a sponsor company for UK visas
  • Indeed the rules are changing, therefore employment within the EU Community is no longer an internal hire but a foreign engagement. Your company will require a UK visa sponsor licence to employ people from outside the UK (it used to be from outside the EU). Applying early is key. Your business needs to prove that it is eligible and also prove that its candidates are applicable to the workforce. This process will take time and considering the upcoming timetable for Brexit, applications are now flooding in, creating a serious backlog. The Guardian's article UK hits visa cap on skilled workers for third month in row highlights the issue of the workload that the Home Office is meeting pre-Brexit.
  1. Train a new workforce
  • Training a new workforce can be rewarding for the business and for employees. With an ever changing, remote and flexible workforce the modern employee has different needs. Potentially, given the right skills, you can earn a future workforce that is local and committed to the success of the business.

In conclusion it's best to be prepared for the worst than not be prepared at all. Engaging a professional who understands workplace immigration is key. The impact of the loss of any workforce is operationally damaging, and it does affect your financial stability. Therefore prepare yourself and address the demands that can affect the future of your talented workforce. Your business will benefit and at the same time, the relationship between you and your workforce may gain also.

Herman Santiago is a Partner, Relationship & Consult Management, at Nabas International Lawyers. He advises commercial clients on how to migrate their business into the UK market.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

With Brexit looming closer by the day, what current immigration case law will be affected, once the UK leaves the European Courts of Justice in 2019?

Whilst the UK remains within the European Union for now, any judgements decided within the European Courts of Justice (ECJ) have precedence over UK national laws. Therefore, this means that any immigration related case law decisions will automatically impact upon the UK immigration process.

Examples of the ECJ overruling UK immigration law begun in 1992 with the notorious ‘Surinder Singh’ case [R v. Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh ex parte secretary of state for the Home Department] in which has led to many EU citizens having right’s that they normally would not have.

Within the case, the ECJ overruled the UK’s “primary purpose rule” for proving the status of a relationship with a British Citizen, with the ECJ “right to freedom of movement” law. From this, the ‘Surinder Singh Route’ remains a valid immigration option for immigrating spouse and partners to this day, within the UK.

However, after Brexit, the ‘Surinder Singh Route’ may become affected, in which the UK, being outside of the ECJ, may return to the more stricter immigration law of “primary purpose rule”, which will affect many EU citizens who are in a relationship and residing with British citizens.

Other case laws that may become affected post Brexit are the “Metock” case [Metock v. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law reform (2008)] in which after Brexit, if an ‘over-stayer’ remains, then regardless of that individual’s relationship, the UK will view this person as an illegal immigrant – This is a significant change from the ‘Metock’ decision, in which an unlawfully residing Non-EU national within the UK could remain if they entered into an ‘authentic’ relationship with a residing EU national in the UK.

Furthermore, the “Zambrano” decision [Gerado Ruiz Zambrano v. Office National de l’emploi (ONEm) C-34/0 (2011)] will also be affected post Brexit, in which is based upon a Non-EEA parent of a child of EU citizenship status having the “right to work” and the “right to care” under the ECJ, also known as the “Zambrano Principle”.

Thus, post Brexit, due to the UK Government desiring to tighten the definitions of “family reunification” and “family member” within its immigration rules, these three key cases decided by the ECJ will be affected, in which could cause turmoil for current EU citizens residing within the UK.

Rahul Batra is the Managing Partner at Hudson McKenzie with over 15 years’ experience. He provides high-quality legal services to start-ups, SME’s and multi-nationals advising on a range of commercial matters including JV’s, company formation, contracts-shareholder & IP agreements, Directors’ disputes, sponsor licences, Tier 1 & Tier 2 visas.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 
GC secrets How GCs lead: 10 key traits

What are the qualities that make for the best leaders in legal departments? Sterling Miller distils his 25 years of GC experience at Marketo, Sabre Corporation and Travelocity.com into this article on the 10 key traits for legal department leadership.

-- 6 things that modern GCs really want

The role of the GC is broader than ever before, and finding reliable, forward thinking external counsel is key to helping GCs optimise their performance. Steven Walker, an experienced GC turned independent consultant, summarises the 6 things that modern GCs are looking for time and again.

-- Secrets to reducing legal spend

In a survey of FTSE 100 in-house teams, The Lawyer has found that teams are more successful in reducing legal spend by improving their management of external counsel (through panels, negotiating rates with external advisers and implementing billing policies) rather than by using technology.

Legal ops Innovation ≠ automation

Lucy Bassli, former assistant GC of legal operations and contracting at Microsoft Corp argues that innovation doesn’t equal automation:

“Sometimes it can, but right now, especially for where the legal industry is, there’s a ton of innovation that can happen with just optimizing processes, just rethinking your resource allocation, the who’s doing what type of work, who’s doing which parts of the process.”

-- Stop “tolerating” old-fashioned law firms

Richard Susskind, author of Tomorrow’s Lawyers, urges in-house lawyers to stop “tolerating” old-fashioned law firms. Legal operations is breaking down traditional ways of working, and with in-house teams coming together to share techniques and content, we are “moving towards an open source concept of legal content”.

Legal tech How will AI affect the legal profession?

39% of in-house counsel expect that AI will be commonplace in legal work within ten years. Lauri Donahue, Director of Legal Content for LawGeex, provides a helpful primer on using AI in the legal profession. The various legal and ethical implications of AI are also rapidly coming to the fore.

-- Why legal tech fails: top GC mistakes

Andrew Mellett, CEO of Plexus, a NewLaw provider based in Australia, predicts that many GCs are setting themselves up for frustration and failure when trying to implement legal tech. He explains the top 8 traps that GCs have fallen into.

Design thinking Comic contracts

Most people don’t read the small print. In a bid to make legal contracts understandable, lawyers are rethinking contract design using mind maps, illustrations and even contracts in comic strip form. Here’s an NDA in 3 pictures.

-- A fresh approach for lawyers

Design thinking should be a tool for lawyers to better serve clients, argues Helder Santos, a Senior Business Technology Manager. By taking a human-centered approach, which is already popular in many other industries, and using it as a framework for the delivery of legal services, lawyers can think differently about problems and come up with innovative solutions.

Lexoo How we can help you

An FT Innovative Lawyers Awards 2017 winner, we have helped GCs across all sectors including tech, media, telecoms, renewable energy, oil and gas, finance, real estate and retail to vastly reduce their legal spend by building effective, long-lasting relationships with high-quality boutique firms around the world.

Want to find out more about how Lexoo can help your team? Request a demo now.

Read Full Article
Visit website
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

Around 3.6 million EU nationals currently live in the UK, including nearly 600,000 children. Ever since the EU Referendum result in June 2016, there has been much discussion around what will happen to these people, and indeed what will happen to UK citizens who have already settled in other EU countries, once Brexit has happened.

Uncertainty was lifted in December 2017 when Theresa May confirmed all EU nationals living in the UK will now be able to gain “settled status” and stay here indefinitely, ending many months of concern and speculation. In addition to guaranteeing the rights of EU citizens and their family members living in the UK after Brexit, the Government has now agreed that UK nationals living in the EU will also receive protection. There will be no change to the status of EU citizens living in the UK whilst it remains in the EU.

Essentially, when the UK formally leaves the European Union in March 2019, no EU citizen currently living here legally will be required to leave the country. Under the new agreement, EU citizens who arrive by this leaving date and have lived in the UK for 5 years or more will be able to apply to stay going forward by gaining this ‘settled status’. Notably, there will still be sufficient time for people to apply for and receive their new residence status after the UK leaves the EU.

What if they’ve been here less than 5 years?

If an EU national has not lived in the UK for 5 years or more when the country leaves the EU, they can still apply for permission to stay on until they reach the 5-year threshold. After that, they can then apply for settled status in the same way. EU citizens who wish to stay in the UK will be able to apply for their new status through a specially designed scheme due to get underway later this year. All rights to UK benefits, pensions and access to healthcare will stay the same.

Family members

Any family member of an EU national - whether dependant or not - who is currently living with or planning to join family who are already here needs to have done so by 29th March 2019. They will then also be able to apply for settled status after 5 years in the UK.

Children born to resident EU nationals living in the UK after it has left the EU are protected as long as their parents are. Close family members will also still be able to apply to join their families in the UK after Brexit.

Changes to the application process for settled status

The new application process to achieve settled status for EU citizens will be very different from the one that’s in use at the moment in terms of documentation. At present, permanent residence documents are explicit in confirming that an individual has rights under European law. In future, EU law will no longer apply to the UK, and the migration and status of EU nationals will be subject to UK law.

If you have gone through the process already and received a document stating you have permanent residence here, all you will need to do is exchange it for settled status.

Giselle Brown is an expert legal advisor with years of experience in all areas of UK immigration from Tier 1 Visas to naturalisation and citizenship.

Read Full Article
Visit website

Read for later

Articles marked as Favorite are saved for later viewing.
close
  • Show original
  • .
  • Share
  • .
  • Favorite
  • .
  • Email
  • .
  • Add Tags 

Separate tags by commas
To access this feature, please upgrade your account.
Start your free month
Free Preview