Wrigley Claydon Solicitors

Author:

  • Pokémon (No) Go – ensure you’re not trespassing for Pokémon

    Pokémon (No) Go – ensure you’re not trespassing for Pokémon

    Players of the recent phenomenon Pokémon Go should be careful, in case they find themselves facing court proceedings for trespass on private land.

    If there is a real and apparent risk that the gathering of Pokémon hunters could cause injury to property or people, there is a case law that suggests a landowner can obtain an injunction against ‘Persons Unknown’ prohibiting them from causing the threatened nuisance or trespass.

    It is unlikely that Nintendo, as the producer of ‘Pokémon Go’ would be liable since it does not encourage trespassing and a disclaimer appears on screen at the start of the game. However, a man in the US said strangers started lingering outside of his home with at least five people knocking on his door and has commenced a lawsuit.

    While the occasional misguided trespass is unlikely to result in court proceedings, repeat offenders may find themselves facing an injunction.

    If you find that your property has been subject to trespass or any nuisance or indeed you have been served with an injunction for whatever reason then we suggest you speak to Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department. He can advise you on the appropriate course of action and assist with any legal documents or proceedings that may occur.

    Please call our harassment and trespass solicitors on 0161 785 3534 or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com

  • The successful appeal of Metroline in an employment tribunal sounds a new note says employment law solicitor

    Mr Ibrahim Ajaj was an employee at Metroline West Ltd (“Metroline”) for 10 years and was dismissed for gross misconduct for deceptively alleging that he could no longer perform his duties after an injury at work. His allegation was supported by an occupational health advisor and physiotherapist.

    However Metroline decided to covertly survey him and hired an external doctor to verify his injuries. The findings by the external doctor revealed that Mr Ajaj’s injuries were inconsistent with his descriptions and Metroline suspected he had made his injuries up to profit from sick pay.

    He was invited to a disciplinary hearing, and dismissed. Thereafter he issued legal proceedings. The Employment Appeal Tribunal decided that the Employer had a potentially fair reason to dismiss Mr Ajaj.

    Where does the Tribunal decision leave the employee who takes the occasional ‘sick day’?

    Can you be dismissed for ‘taking a sick day’ for no apparent good reason? At the outset, few employers would go to the lengths of surveying their employees for a few days off sick. Secondly, in many cases it might be disproportionate to dismiss an employee for calling in sick because, say, he is hung over. However, lying is dishonesty and dishonesty can facilitate an employee’s dismissal. In any event, the employer’s handbook can be consulted to fully understand the implications.

    There is also an implied relationship of trust between employer and employee that shouldn’t be taken lightly. If an employee takes multiple days off, while deceptively alleging to be sick, the question begs whether he should be working at a job he has little passion for.

    It is important for both employers and employees to understand their obligations and rights.

    If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our employment law solicitor, John Porter, on 0161 624 6811 or email jap@wrigleyclaydon.com.
  • Daughter and step mother locked in bitter will dispute

    Daughter and step mother locked in bitter will dispute

    A daughter who was left nothing in her late father’s £1million will is battling her stepmother over the fortune.

    Danielle Ames told the Court she ‘idolised’ her father, Michael Ames, that he was her ‘best friend’ and that he ‘doted’ on her as his only child. However, she was shocked when her father, who ran a glazing business, died in 2013 and left his entire fortune to Danielle’s step-mother, Elaine Ames.

    The daughter is now trying to convince a Judge that she is due £300,000 as ‘reasonable provision’ from her father’s estate.

    However, her stepmother is arguing that her late husband deliberately cut his daughter out, as he had a strong work ethic and believed grown-up children should ‘look after themselves.’ She told the Judge that he had given the daughter financial support to set up her own picture framing business and therefore the will makes reasonable financial provision for all parties.

    The daughter and her family currently have a monthly deficit of over £2,000 and she is struggling to make ends meet. She also has debts of £10,000.

    However, the stepmother said that Ms Ames is a grown up, ‘fit and able to work’ and ought to stand on her own two feet.

    She told the Judge that her husband had promised her that his money would be used to look after her in her old age. She detailed a ‘list of ailments’ she is afflicted with.

    The bulk of Mr Ames’ assets are tied up in the four-bedroom £650,000 family home in Hoddesdon, where Mrs Ames still lives. She says she would be forced to sell the home she has lived in for 13 years, if ordered to satisfy Ms Ames’ claim.

    Urging both women to put their animosity aside, Judge Halpern told them their personal feelings about each other were of little relevance to the case.

    As at September 2016, the hearing continues.

    Disputes can be very complex and require expert legal guidance to resolve matters as fairly as possible. At Wrigley Claydon, we fight on your behalf to make this difficult time a little easier, whether you are bringing a claim or you are on the receiving end. We are experienced in this field and have won complex cases for our clients. As it is an emotional time we deal with our cases sensitively ensuring that all of our clients are happy with each stage of the process and the outcome of proceedings.

    If you are looking for will dispute advice do not hesitate to contact us. Call 0161 624 6811 to speak to to Shalish Mehta, in our civil and commercial litigation department or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com.
  • Neighbour dispute concerning overgrown trees

    Neighbour dispute concerning overgrown trees

    A millionaire businessman has been ordered to chop down 80ft trees in the grounds of his mansion after a neighbour dispute that they blocked out sunlight and could crush their homes.

    James Turnbull’s £1.4million estate borders a row of gardens in the upmarket village of Bridge of Weir, Renfrewshire. Neighbours claimed the trees were ruining their properties and stopping sunlight from getting into their homes.

    One neighbour claimed he slept in his living room in case trees collapsed and fell into his bedroom and also stated that he was forced to switch on lights during the day due to trees blocking the natural light.

    He took his complaint to the Scottish Government after Renfrewshire Council rejected his earlier application to have the trees cut down on the basis that ‘significant gaps’ within the hedge allowed sunlight to pass through and dismissed a bid to have them cut down.

    However, Government reporter Robert Seaton has now ruled the trees should be chopped by October. He stated, “The removal of these trees should be sufficient to address the matters of sunlight and daylight to the appellants’ properties and their gardens as well as the issues of the dominance of hedge and needle fall.”

    Although the above is a Scottish case there are many courses of action you can take when dealing with a neighbour dispute in order to maintain cordial relations.

    Speak to Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com. He can advise you on the appropriate course of action and assist with any legal documents or proceedings that may occur.
  • Estate dispute solicitors

    Estate dispute solicitors

    Two sisters, who were cut out of their father’s will on his deathbed, have launched a legal fight for his £4million estate – claiming he was mentally unbalanced by surviving the Hillsborough disaster.

    Thomas Fitzgerald was hours from death and speaking through an oxygen mask when he disinherited his daughters in 2012. The daughters did not need his money, he said, and instead bequeathed his fortune to his new partner and his sisters.

    At the High Court the daughters and their mother claimed his experiences at Hillsborough and other traumatic life events left him so emotionally damaged he was mentally unfit to make a will.

    The daughters and their mother challenged the will at the High Court in 2014, but the Judge ruled that Mr Fitzgerald knew his own mind.

    The Judge rejected claims that he lacked the mental capacity to make a valid will or did not ‘know of and approve’ of its contents and therefore dismissed the case.

    But his daughters and their mother, who Mr Fitzgerald was divorcing at the time of his death, are now fighting in the Court of Appeal battle for a share of the Estate on the basis that the deceased did not understand the impact of his will and therefore should be overturned.

    The daughters and their mother are arguing that the reason given in the will for leaving out the daughters – that they were not dependents – was wrong. They allege that they had ‘emotional dependence’ on their father.

    Will disputes can be very complex and require expert legal guidance to resolve matters as fairly as possible.

    At Wrigley Claydon, we fight on your behalf to make this difficult time a little easier, whether you are bringing a claim or you are on the receiving end. We are experienced in this field and have won complex cases for our clients.

    As it is an emotional time we deal with our cases sensitively ensuring that all of our clients are happy with each stage of the process and the outcome of proceedings.

    If you are looking for Will and Estate dispute solicitors do not hesitate to contact us. Call 0161 785 3534 to speak to to Shalish Mehta, in our civil and commercial litigation department or email sm@wrigleyclaydon.com.
  • Breach of contract solicitors

    Breach of contract solicitors

    A QC is facing a bill of hundreds of thousands of pounds after he lost a six-year court battle over the purchase of a £3.6 million 30 room 18th century manor.

    William Griffiths QC fought against Alan Hardy in a bid to avoid having to pay him for pulling out of a deal to buy Laughton Manor in Sussex, which was overhauled by a friend of Queen Victoria.

    The purchase was cancelled after Mr Griffiths discovered damp, rot and timber decay but a court ruled that Mr Griffiths had broken his contract with Mr Hardy and after losing an appeal Mr Griffiths must pay Mr Hardy £385,000 in compensation and costs.

    Mr Griffiths withdrew from the deal and refused to pay the £210,000 owed as part of a 10 percent deposit.

    Mr Hardy in turn said he would not refund the £150,000 which had already paid.

    In 2014, the Court ruled that Mr Griffiths had no right to pull out of the deal and ordered him to pay £235,000 damages for breach of contract, in addition to the £150,000.

    In April 2016 the Court of Appeal, sided with Mr Hardy, ruling that Mr Griffiths had no prospect of success in overturning the previous High Court decision.

    Mr Griffiths claimed that Mr Hardy had misled him about the condition of property during the sale.

    However, the Court of Appeal accepted Mr Hardy’s evidence that he had never had the house surveyed and was unaware of any damp problem and found that Mr Hardy had an ‘unconditional right’ to cancel the contract when Mr Griffiths failed to pay the balance of the deposit or complete on time.

    If you wish to make a claim for breach of contract, or indeed are facing a breach of contract claim then call our breach of contract solicitors on 0161 785 3534 and speak to Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department or email shalish.mehta@wrigleyclaydon.com.

  • (Snack) attack, on family solicitor fees

    If football pundit Gary Lineker has recently attacked family solicitor fees because they “manipulate” the situation to increase their costs it is probably the thought of giving away all those crisp notes! In any event, his assessment is not borne out by the experience of Wrigley Claydon’s family team.

    Mr Lineker’s suggestion of a formula to assist in working out a financial settlement in all cases may be an admirable proposition in principle. However, we all know that the financial background of one married couple can be very different from another and the application of a formula across the board would be problematic.

    By contrast the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, which governs financial issues on divorce and civil partnership dissolution, sets out a list of factors the court should consider when addressing financial issues (eg age, earning capacity, contributions, financial resources etc) and all family solicitors will have this in mind when discussing and negotiating matters. This non-exhaustive list gives the court the discretion needed to achieve fairness between the parties. The uncertainty that this may cause has to be seen in the context of the flexible approach that can be applied by the court.

    And whatever Mr Lineker might think, the procedure in family cases is governed by the Family Proceedings Rules 2010 which at the outset (rule 1.1) make it clear that the overriding objective is to “deal with cases justly”, which includes dealing with matters expeditiously, proportionately, saving expense and ensuring the parties are on an equal footing.

    The massive reduction in legal aid eligibility in family matters has meant that early advice from a specialist is essential.

    As family law solicitors we are specialists dealing with people from a variety of backgrounds and can assist our clients in finding their solution during what is probably a difficult time.

    For further advice or information contact Jill Walker who heads up the Family Law department at Wrigley Claydon solicitors – 0161 624 6811 or email rjw@wrigleyclaydon.com
  • Wrigley Claydon partners part of mentoring scheme at Oldham College

    Wrigley Claydon partners part of mentoring scheme at Oldham College

    Two of our partners, Rachel Damianou and John Porter, are part of a new mentoring scheme at Oldham College. As part of the national Career Ready programmes, Rachel and John will meet monthly with their students to help prepare them for life as a law professional.

    An article detailing the scheme in Oldham Chronicle’s The Knowledge is printed below in full:

    Rachel Damianou works for Oldham’s oldest law firm and is keen to pass on her experience to students. A partner and head of wills and probate at Wrigley Claydon solicitors, Rachel is now among staff members who have become mentors to law students at Oldham College.

    She is looking forward to helping shape tomorrow’s law practitioners, “It’s all very well studying theory, but you need some practical knowledge too. Law is getting more and more competitive these days. We can also pass on what we are looking for in potential employees. So the mentoring benefits both the students and our company.”

    During the year Rachel and her assigned student will meet every month to develop the student’s CV, promote networking, interviewing skills and general employability. While doing work experience at Wrigley Claydon students will have access to all areas of the legal profession.

    The mentoring programme is part of Career Ready, a national initiative to get students ready for work, part of which is four weeks of work experience.

    The college introduced the Career Ready programme to its finance department five years ago, and it also operates in the business leadership department.

    College business manager Shazia Afzal said, “Mentoring is the best way to get into the field that interests them.”

    Law student Ellie Webster, (19), from Diggle, is mentored by the firm’s John Porter, “John has aleady succeeded and achieved his goals, and he’ll be passing on his knowledge to me.” After the two-year course Ellie will receive a BTEC extended diploma – equivalent to three A-levels. She then plans to study law at university.

     

  • Dying Matters Awareness Week 2016

    Dying Matters Awareness Week 2016

    Dying Matters Awareness Week, which runs from 9th-15th May, encourages people to talk about and prepare for dying.

    The national campaign aims to highlight the importance of talking more openly about dying, death and bereavement, and to make plans for the end of life.

    The year’s campaign is focused around the #BigConversation. The hashtag, to be used across digital platforms, is designed to encourage people to talk openly about what are commonly difficult issues. The messaging is quite direct with strap lines including ‘Talking about dying won’t make it happen‘. It is hoped the hard-hitting one-liners will help break down the barriers and stigma around death and help society as a whole to recognise that death and bereavement are a part of the natural life cycle, and that talking about it will help us all us all to cope better with issues surrounding death.

    The Dying Matters Coalition has planned a series of Twitter chats throughout Dying Matters Awareness Week. Each day between 1 and 2pm will look at the following topics:

    Monday 9 May: The importance of making a funeral plan

    Tuesday 10 May: Planning for your future care and support

    Wednesday 11 May: The importance of making a will

    Thursday 12 May: Signing up as an organ donor

    Friday 13 May: Making sure your loved ones know your plans

    Saturday 14 May and Sunday 15 May: Your choice – chat about anything and everything related to dying, death and bereavement.

    Professionals, those with personal experiences or anyone with a question are encouraged to join the conversation using the hashtag #BigConversation.

    For more information about the campaign, visit www.dyingmatters.org or twitter.com/DyingMatters.

    The Wills, Probate and Trusts solicitors at Wrigley Claydon are experienced professionals who can help prepare your Will, give advice on appointing a Power or Attorney, or support loved ones through Probate or a Will Dispute.

    Please contact our friendly and compassionate team on 0161 624 6811 or email Rachel Damianou at rld@wrigleyclaydon.com.

  • Artist Prince died without a Will – our Will dispute solicitors look at the evidence

    Prince, the singer who died on 21 April 2016 is believed to have left no will behind which opens up the possibility of a battle over his fortune.

    Londell McMillan, Prince’s former lawyer, said: “It’s likely there is no will. He couldn’t face it. He didn’t think he would die.”

    Prince left an estate variously valued at between $150 million and $800 million.

    He was twice divorced and had no surviving children or parents.

    Prince’s only full blood relative is his younger sister, singer Tyka Nelson but he also had five half-siblings from his father’s second marriage who might try to argue that they had an equal claim.

    Will disputes can be very complex and require expert legal guidance to resolve matters as fairly as possible.

    At Wrigley Claydon, we fight on your behalf to make this difficult time a little easier, whether you are bringing a claim or you are on the receiving end. We are experienced in this field and have won complex cases for our clients.

    As it is an emotional time we deal with each case sensitively ensuring that all of our clients are happy with each stage of the process and the outcome of proceedings.

    If you are looking for advice from Will dispute solicitors, do not hesitate to contact us. Call 0161 785 3534 to speak to Shalish Mehta in our civil and commercial litigation department or email shalish.mehta@wrigleyclaydon.com.