Wrigley Claydon Solicitors

Author:

  • Multi billion pound divorces often make the news…

    ….and they don’t come bigger than that of the world’s richest man, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos (aged 54). Mr Bezos’ current net worth of $137 billion (approximately £107 billion) will be shared with his wife (aged 48).

    Their divorce will be dealt with under the state laws of Washington which operates a “community property” model meaning anything built up during the marriage will be owned equally and would need to be divided in a fair manner. However even if Mrs Bezos was to get a third of the wealth it would still make her the richest women in the world!

    It isn’t known whether a prenuptial agreement is in place, when the couple married 25 years ago they were both relatively young and only starting out in their careers and possibly gave little thought to financial matters. They have four children also to be taken into account.

    Rhona Royle, Head of Family Law at Wrigley Claydon Solicitors in Oldham, Todmorden and Manchester explains that Prenuptial Agreements or “Prenups” are not currently binding in England or Wales but where one exists its contents can be taken into account as one circumstance of the case.

    The divorce court retains discretion as to what order to approve as being “fair and reasonable” to both parties.

    They are however becoming increasingly more popular where parties going into a marriage want to try to protect family wealth or to keep one’s own assets. Where there has been prior a marriage and a wish to protect assets for the children of the first marriage they are advisable.

    Another reason to enter into one is to create certainty (so far as it is possible to do so).

    To give the best chance of the terms of such an agreement being found reasonable the parties ought to fully and frankly disclose their financial circumstances to the other, each should have the benefit of independent legal advice and there should have been no pressure placed to enter into it.

    The Bezos may very well have already agreed a financial settlement prior to the public statement of their intended divorce and if so, the terms are not likely to be made public.

    Email: rmr@wrigleyclaydon.com

  • Intellectual Property Dispute: Shanks vs Unilever

    In the case of Shanks-v-Unilever Plc the Supreme Court had to consider what amounts to an “outstanding benefit” for the purposes of determining whether an employee who has made an invention belonging to an employer for which a patent has been granted is entitled to compensation pursuant to s.40(1) of the Patents Act 1977?

    During the course of his employment with Unilever, Professor Shanks invented a device designed to measure glucose concentrations in blood, serum or urine.

    The rights to the invention belonged to Unilever, which subsequently obtained patents in respect of the invention. Years later, these patents were licensed to companies operating in the blood glucose testing field. Professor Shanks brought a claim for employee compensation against Unilever pursuant to s.40 (1) of the Patents Act 1977. The Intellectual Property Office concluded that the financial benefit to Unilever from licensing the patent rights was £24.5m, but that this was not an “outstanding” benefit as required by the terms of s.40(1). This conclusion was upheld by the High Court and Court of Appeal.

    Suffering an intellectual property and technology disputes can have serious implications on your business. Our business solicitors will quickly and efficiently put your case together and act on your behalf.

     

    Call Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department on 0161 624 6811(Option 6) or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com. We can advise you on the appropriate course of action and assist with any legal documents or proceedings that may occur.

  • Today is “Divorce day”!

    January is always a busy time for Divorce lawyers and today is the day that more people start Divorce proceedings than any other day in the year.

    HM Courts and Tribunal Service received 455 online Divorce applications between Christmas Eve and New Year’s Day with 13 (unlucky for some) submitted on Christmas day itself.

    The wrong gift, the added financial pressure and the forced jollities of Christmas can strain many relationships.

    Relate (the counselling service for couples) sees a surge in calls in January many from people who were already at crisis point in their relationship prior to Christmas but who “put on a face” through the break hoping to “hold it together” until the New Year.

    Rhona Royle, Head of Family Law at Wrigley Claydon Solicitors in Oldham, Todmorden and Manchester Rhona explains: We see many people getting in touch with us in December looking for advice on the consequences of a relationship separation but who will “come back in the New Year” and high proportions do.

    Tens of thousands will search terms such as Divorce/Separation and splitting up online in January

    January is seen as a new beginning and those who have struggled in an unhappy relationship for months often make resolutions to make a fresh start which can mean striking out alone.

    While a relationship break-up can cause huge emotional strain and needs to be handled sensitively, it can also have serious financial consequences and taking the right advice early whether that be from a Solicitor, a relationship counsellor or independent financial advisor is key.

    Email: rmr@wrigleyclaydon.com

  • A Pet is not just for Christmas

    Everyone has heard this phrase which is particularly pertinent at this time of year. We are a nation of pet lovers and yet it is estimated that thousands of pet owners in the UK also die each year without making any arrangement for their pets in the event of their death.

    If you do not make provision then you do run the risk that your beloved pet will be left unwanted, uncared for and even homeless. Your Pet may be inherited by someone who is not an animal lover. However many people will at this time of year be considering making as Will as part of their New Year’s resolution and your pets could be provided for in your Will.

    The Law treats pets as “property” and therefore it is possible to make gifts of family pets in your Will so you need to consider, is there a family member or friend who would be willing and able to look after your pet?   It is important that you discuss this with that person to make sure that they are happy to take on the responsibility of caring for your pet. Caring for your pet can be a financial burden and it is a good idea to leave in your Will, to the person whom you would like to look after your pet , a sum of money to cover the cost of caring for your pet. It is also important that you include any future pets that you may have at the date of your death in your Will and likewise it is important that you consider that if you have made any cash gifts purely for the pets’ maintenance to your chosen person, it is conditional upon the pet being alive at your death. There are also many Charities who run free re-homing schemes who you may wish to nominate to look after your Pets.

    If you don’t specifically mention your pets in your Will they may be inherited by someone who is not an animal lover.

    For advice on including pets in your Will or making a Will generally, please contact Rachel Damianou or Jyoti Patel on 0161 624 6811 (Option 3) or call into our Clinic details of which are below.

  • Supreme Court Dismisses Application

    The Supreme Court, which is the UK’s highest court, has dismissed an emergency application from lawyers for Noel Conway, a retired lecturer who is paralysed from the neck down by progressive motor neurone disease, to hear a right-to-die case challenging the legal ban on assisted dying.

    The three Supreme Court justices acknowledged that the issue was of “transcendent public importance”, however, the justices decided there was little chance of success if Conway’s claim were heard in full by the court.

    The judges added that any change to the law would have to be for parliament, although it would be within the Supreme Court’s powers to make a declaration that UK law was incompatible with Conway’s rights under the European convention on human rights.

    They said Conway could bring about his own death by refusing consent to the continuation of the “non-invasive ventilation” keeping him alive.

    Helping someone kill themselves is a criminal offence carrying a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison.

  • Yellow Belly beer brewery to end production

    Yellow Belly beer, brewed by Buxton Brewery, which is at the centre of a trademark dispute, will cease production.

    An objection to the name Yellow Belly was raised by Batemans Brewery earlier this year. Batemans said the name Yellow Belly was too similar to its Yella Belly Gold.

    Buxton Brewery said they spoke to Batemans over the telephone about the dispute, “but it was immediately apparent that there was absolutely no room for manoeuvre”.

    Buxton said the two products were “distinct and entirely different in every conceivable manner”.

    With over 22,000 breweries worldwide, Buxton said creating “truly unique and distinct” beer is becoming more difficult, and that protecting and honouring intellectual property “is something that all producers have a responsibility to do”.

    Suffering an intellectual property and technology disputes can have serious implications on your business. Our business solicitors will help you put your case together and act on your behalf.

    Call Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department on 0161 624 6811(Option 6) or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com. We can advise you on the appropriate course of action and assist with any legal documents or proceedings that may occur.

  • Probert v Moore

    Bethany Probert, a 13 year old girl, was severely injured walking along the carriageway on a 60mph unlit road at 5:00pm in December 2009. A hedgerow required her to walk in the road.

    The defendant driver, Mr Moore said that Bethany was also partly to blame in that it was dark and she was walking on the left hand side of the road and had not been wearing a high visibility jacket. However, the Court held that Bethany could not be negligent. The Judge found that:

    ‘An ordinary 13 year old should not be expected to consider taking the same level of precautions as an adult. It would be asking too much of her to say that she should not have started to walk home at all, waited for her mother or accepted lift, or should not have started to walk home without borrowing a high visibility jacket, reflective markings or torch from the stables”.

    Mr Moore’s insurers, Churchill, have been given leave to appeal the decision.

    Suffering an injury that was not your fault can have a major impact on your life. Our injury solicitors will quickly and efficiently put your case together and act on your behalf. Call Shalish Mehta in our litigation department on 0161 624 6811(Option 6) or email vjs@wrigleyclaydon.com. We can help our clients receive the compensation they deserve following accidents where they have suffered personal injury or financial loss.

  • Christmas and New Years Opening Times 2018

    Christmas and New Years Opening Times 2018

    Please note the office will be closed from 5.00pm on

    Friday 21st December 2018 and will re-open 9.00am on Wednesday 2nd January 2019.

  • British microchip-maker Imagination Technologies calls off legal action against Apple

    British microchip-maker Imagination Technologies have called off a threatened ­legal action against Apple over a dispute regarding its graphics technology.

    In 2017 it emerged that Apple planned to design its own iPhone graphics processors instead of using ­Imagination’s designs. Imagination’s shares crashed and eventually it was sold off to Canyon Bridge for £550m.

    Imagination had started a “dispute resolution procedure”, and questioned whether Apple was capable of designing its own chips without Imagination’s intellectual property.

    Imagination’s designs featured in every iPhone and iPad from 2008 until 2017, when Apple started reducing its reliance on the company. Apple describes the graphics units in its new iPhones as being completely Apple-designed.

    Imagination does not know if it would continue to receive any royalties on the new iPhones. However, it was now concentrating on applying its expertise to new areas such as artificial intelligence, and hoped Apple would license its technology again in future.

    Suffering an intellectual property and technology dispute can have serious implications on your business. Our business solicitors will help put your case together and act on your behalf.

    Call Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department on 0161 624 6811(Option 6) or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com. We can advise you on the appropriate course of action and assist with any legal documents or proceedings that may occur.

  • End the blame game

    Last month from the 26th to the 30th of November was “Good Divorce Week” (is there really such a thing?!) which fell during the governments divorce law consultation.

    Our divorce law is now over 50 years old. There are over 100,000 couples who start Divorce proceedings each year.

    You may know that unless you have been separated for two years and your spouse consents (or five years if they do not) you have to attribute blame.

    You can’t merely say “we have grown apart” or there are “irreconcilable differences” you have to allege unreasonable behaviour/ adultery or desertion.

    Having to cite fault increases conflict and makes sorting out arrangements for children and finance more difficult.

    I know this first hand having been in family law for over 20 years.

    I am a member of Resolution; an organisation of family justice professionals who work with individuals to reduce/ manage any conflict or confrontation and who are also campaigning for a change in the law.

    At Wrigley Claydon we support and encourage families to put the best interests of any children first.

    We have a highly experienced team of professionals who understand the emotional and financial consequences of a separation and will guide you through the process to get the best outcome for you and your children.

    For an initial no obligation chat contact us on 0161 624 6811