Archive for March, 2010

Have you received treatment from Mr George Rowland?

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010

Liverpool Womens Hospital is currently reviewing the practice of Mr George Rowland, a Consultant Urogynaecologist, with the Trust.

The patients in question underwent surgery between 2001 and 2008 for specific problems such as urinary incontinence and vaginal prolapse.

The Trust has referred Mr Rowland to the General Medical Council.

If you have received treatment from Mr Rowland either between these dates or at any other time and would like a free consultation with a member of our Clinical Negligence Team, please contact us on 0151 733 3353. Calls can be taken 24 hours a day. If you prefer, you can contact us by email at rmalloy@gadllp.co.uk.

Gregory Abrams Davidson LLP specialise in obtaining compensation for client’s who have sustained injury as a result of Clinical Negligence. We have many years of experience dealing with claims against hospitals (both NHS and Private), dentists and general practitioners.

Pre Nuptial Agreements

Tuesday, March 16th, 2010

Getting married can be a stressful business. There’s the dress, the photographer, the limousine, the church, the choice of best man, the hen and stag night/weekend/week, the flowers, suit hire, choice of music, wedding breakfast, evening reception, and honeymoon.  Then there’s the worrying about how it’s all going to be paid for.

It is perhaps not surprising that often people who want a pre-nuptial agreement seem to think about them with a month or so to go before the big day.

Pre-nuptial agreements have been growing in popularity, matched only by the recognition given to them by the court in divorce proceedings.

Whilst they are still not absolutely binding, they will, if done properly, be followed wholly or substantially by the courts.

There are 2 common pitfalls that the unwary fall in to:

  1. They must not seem like last minute rush jobs.  The court will want to know that neither party has been placed under undue pressure to agree the settlement.  A last minute agreement gives the impression of undue pressure, and can invalidate the whole agreement.  Agreeing at the time of engagement that both spouses to be want the agreement is ideal.  Both will have enough time properly to consider what they want it to contain, and to take independent legal advice upon it.
  2. It is not an opportunity for the spouse with the greater financial resources to make sure that the other leaves the marriage with nothing.  The agreement is an opportunity to agree in advance what would be reasonable financial provision in the event of divorce.  Any agreement that is clearly unfair to one party may not be upheld by the court.

It is therefore vital to consider a pre-nuptial agreement early if you want it to carry weight in any future court proceedings.

Andrew Lee is a senior associate solicitor at Gregory Abrams Davidson, and a member of the Advanced Family Law Panel of the Law Society. He can be contacted on 0151 236 5000 or at alee@gadllp.co.uk

We are going to name her Asda

Monday, March 15th, 2010

Asda has shaken up the IVF market by declaring that it is going to sell fertility drugs at cost price.  Asda declared that the decision was to establish itself as the most competitive pharmacy in Britain.

Currently all but two NHS Trusts offer free IVF treatment but this is only for a limited number of cycles.  Thereafter the expensive treatment has to be paid for by the couples themselves.

The Daily Mail has however reported that more and more women are being forced to go private for treatment because of the NHS cutting back on the number of IVF cycles it provides to those with fertility problems.

Although Primary Care Trusts are supposed to provide 3 free cycles a post code lottery means 71% of Primary Care Trusts fund only one or two leaving couples to pick up the cost of further treatment.

Asda’s pharmacist, John Evans, said “we know that an IVF post code lottery means that a considerable number of women will have to pay for additional cycles of treatment and lots of customers have spoken to us about the issue.  IVF is extremely expensive”.

Is it only time before the grateful parents of a much longed for new born show their eternal thanks by naming their child Asda?

 Gregory Abrams Davidson LLP specialise in obtaining compensation for client’s who have sustained injury as a result of Clinical Negligence. We have many years of experience dealing with claims against hospitals (both NHS and Private), dentists and general practitioners. Examples include claims arising as a result of negligently performed operations, misdiagnosis of cancer, injuries arising as a result of negligently performed cosmetic surgery and injuries sustained at birth.

 We have offices in Liverpool City Centre, Garston Village and Allerton.  If you would like to enquire about a potential Clinical Negligence claim, contact a member of our Team on 0151 733 3353. Calls can be taken 24 hours a day or e-mail us at rmalloy@gadllp.co.uk

Harris v The Beneficiaries of the Estate of Margaret Alice Cooper (deceased) – Jan 2010

Tuesday, March 2nd, 2010

The testatrix died in April 2008. By a home-made will, she left her property to the claimant, who was also her executor. The testatrix’s residuary estate was to be divided equally ‘between her surviving relatives’. The claimant gave evidence that the only relatives that the testatrix had mentioned had been her first cousins on her mother’s side, A, F and P. Further, no mention had been made of another first cousin, E, who had not been seen since 1939, A or P’s families, nor any relative on the testatrix’s father’s side.

The claimant applied for a declaration as to who were the appropriate beneficiaries. The court had to determine who were the objects of the testatrix’s gift and their respective interests, having regard to section 21 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982.

The court ruled: The meaning of each set of words had to be decided by reference to the precise verbal and factual context in which the words had been used. Further the court would strive to give effect to a gift made rather than declare them meaningless and to resort to a partial intestacy. In the circumstances of the instant case, the testatrix had intended to leave her residuary estate to A, F and P alone, to be divided equally between them.

It is likely that the costs of obtaining this declaration from the Court will have incurred the Estate in Legal Bills in excess of £15,000.00. Had the Testatrix come to GAD LLP Solicitors, her simple will instructions will have cost her only £125.00 (plus vat). A false economy on the part of the Testatrix which benefitted no-one except the lawyers and a  problem  that could have been avoided from the outset by having a professionally drafted Will.

Remember that even the most simple of “plain language” can cause horrendous problems within a legal document where it’s interpretation will be essential in determining the legal effect of a clause. What a person “thinks they are saying” and what they are “actually saying” can often be poles apart.

Make a home-made-will at your peril!

Companies Act 2006 – The Main Changes

Monday, March 1st, 2010

The Companies Act 2006 is a piece of primary legislation that is changing the law for companies operating in the United Kingdom and largely applies to companies directly.

Passed in 2006, the Act reached the final stage of implementation on 1st October 2009; a number of its provisions are currently being set out in secondary legislation, mainly through regulations or orders made by statutory instrument.

The Companies Act 1985 has been changed in order to meet four key objectives:

  • To enhance shareholder engagement and a long term investment culture;
  • To ensure better regulation and a ‘Think Small First’ approach;
  • To make it easier to set up and run a company; and
  • To provide flexibility for the future.

A copy of the Companies Act 2006 is available from the Office of Public Sector Information http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006a.htm, or from the Companies Act Publications page of the Companies House website. Further info about the Companies Act 2006 is available on the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform website at http://www.berr.gov.uk/bbf/co-act-2006/index.html

The Companies Act will be supplemented by a series of Regulations using powers given to the Secretary of State in certain parts of the Act. It will be supplemented by Commencements Orders which bring the Act into force. As they are published, details can be at http://www.berr.gov.uk/bbf/co-act-2006/made-or-before-parliament/page35232.html

Some of the key effects resulting from the Act include:-

All Companies:

  • A clear statement of directors’ general duties clarifies the existing case law based rules.
  • Companies will be able to make greater use of electronic communications for communications with shareholders.
  • Directors will automatically have the option of filing a service address on the public record (rather than their private home address).
  • Directors must be at least 16 years old, and all companies must have one natural person as a director – i.e. they cannot have all corporate directors.
  • There will be improved rules for company names.
  • Companies will no longer be required to specify their objects on incorporation.
  • The articles will form the basis of the company’s constitution.

Private companies:

  • There will be separate and simpler model Articles of Association for private companies.
  • As part of the “think small first” agenda, there will be a separate, comprehensive “code” of accounting and reporting requirements for small companies.
  • Private companies will not be required to have a company secretary.
  • Private companies will not need to hold an annual general meeting unless they positively opt to do so.
  • It will be easier for companies to take decisions by written resolutions.
  • There will be simpler rules on share capital, removing provisions that are largely irrelevant to the vast majority of private companies and their creditors.

Key benefits for Shareholders:

  • There will be greater rights for nominee shareholders. These will include the right to receive information electronically or in hard copy if they so wish.
  • There will be more timely accountability to shareholders by requiring public companies to hold their AGM within 6 months of the financial year-end.

Should you have any further questions regarding the Companies Act 2006, please contact Jonathan Abrams, Senior Associate Solicitor in our Corporate department on 0151 236 5000 or direct via email on jabrams@gadllp.co.uk. (Jonathan is also a licensed US Attorney and can answer questions and advise no US Corporate Law matters).