True partnership

Led by Ben Hogan and key partner David Cave, our award-winning Projects & Infrastructure team is ranked Band 1 nationally by Chambers & Partners. Our team consists of lawyers who are experts in the establishment, management and termination/handback of infrastructure projects in a broad variety of sectors. In addition, our team has vast experience of project finance transactions, facilities management services and large-scale governmental and commercial projects.

Our team draws on the expertise of specialist lawyers from other teams within the firm, including procurement, construction, real estate, employment, corporate and banking, who have significant experience of working on infrastructure project transactions. This is key to us providing the seamless and first class service our clients expect.

We are renowned for building strong and lasting relationships with our clients and commence every client relationship with the goal of becoming and remaining a trusted adviser throughout the life cycle of the relevant project.

Sustainable solutions for sustainable infrastructure

Having acted for a wide range of procuring authorities, sponsors, service providers and lenders, we understand the many challenges facing project stakeholders in ensuring that social and economic infrastructure projects deliver the service outcomes required by the procuring entity, as well as projected returns to lenders, investors and subcontractors.

However, we also understand the wider societal and environmental context in which our clients operate and are committed to helping our clients to find ways to deliver truly sustainable infrastructure assets that achieve their social or economic purpose, are energy efficient, resilient and are fully integrated with related systems and networks.

Despite attempts at simplification by government, navigating the planning system remains a potentially time consuming and costly process. Our planning solicitors are experienced at helping clients through this process, whether at the strategic level as the first steps are made towards having a site allocated, helping to shape planning applications, negotiating planning obligation agreements or advising in relation to appeals and legal challenges at the decision making stage.

Our clients include national and regional house builders, commercial developers, government bodies, planning authorities, private sector companies and landed estates.

Rooney v Leicester City Council EA-2020-000070-DA and EA-2021-000256-DA

Since our recent article on the menopause (found here), a new Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision has explored the conduct of Tribunals when assessing menopause as a disability.

What constitutes a disability under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA)?

Under the EqA a person has a disability if:

• They have a physical or mental impairment; and
• The impairment has a substantial and long-term (i.e. it has or is likely to last for at least 12 months or for life) adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

With the symptoms of menopause including hot flushes, sweats, difficulty sleeping, headaches, anxiety, joint stiffness and palpitations, it is likely that, in certain cases, this will meet the test for disability in law.

What are the facts of the case?

The Claimant, Ms Rooney, worked for Leicester City Council as a social worker until her resignation. Following her resignation, Ms Rooney brought a claim for constructive dismissal, but the claim form included an acceptance from her solicitors that her menopause symptoms did not amount to a disability under the EqA.

Ms Rooney then presented a second claim for disability and sex discrimination, harassment and victimisation in relation to her menopause symptoms, which she claimed had been ongoing for two years and included insomnia, fatigues, confusion, light-headedness, confusion, stress, depression, anxiety, palpitations, memory loss, migraines and hot flushes. Ms Rooney highlighted the negative impact this had on her life, that her GP had prescribed hormone replacement therapy and that she had been referred to a consultant at a specialist menopause clinic.

What did the Tribunal decide?

At a preliminary hearing Ms Rooney applied to remove the statement in her claim form that conceded that she was not disabled. The Tribunal subsequently held at a second preliminary hearing that Ms Rooney did not have a disability and her claims were struck out.

Ms Rooney appealed to the EAT.

What did the EAT decide?

The EAT held that the Tribunal erred in law in deciding Ms Rooney was not disabled, and striking out her discrimination claims, without sufficient analysis and or providing sufficient reasons for the decision.

The EAT based this decision on the Tribunal erring in:

• Balancing what Ms Rooney could and could not do from day to day (which contradicted previous case law);
• Failing to consider the meaning of ‘long-term’ under the EqA in assessing whether Ms Rooney was disabled;
• Deciding that Ms Rooney’s menopause symptoms did not have more than a minor or trivial effect on her life;
• Finding that Ms Rooney was not disabled based on the fact that the medical evidence did not support her impact statement and the fact that her original claim stated that she was not disabled;
• Finding that there was nothing to suggest that Ms Rooney’s physical symptoms were long-term or had a substantial effect on her day-to-day activities.

The EAT also upheld the appeal against the strike-out of the sex discrimination, harassment and victimisation claims.

The case is yet to be redecided by the Tribunal.

What can Employers do to Address Menopause in the workplace?

This decision highlights the impact that the menopause can have on workers and indicates that there is limited legal precedent for cases in this arena.

Websites such as Unison and ACAS provide useful tips for employers, such as:

• Implementing flexible working to include comfort breaks throughout the day;
• Providing greater support from line management;
• Maintaining a clear and up to date policy on menopause;
• Ensuring easy access to facilities; and
• Implementing reasonable adjustments where there is a negative impact on the employee’s working life.

Employers should aim to keep up to date with any developments in the current Parliamentary Inquiry and may consider seeking legal advice on policies and best practice when dealing with menopause in the workplace.

This article is for information purposes only and is not a substitute for legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Please contact Rachael Lloyd to discuss any issues you are facing.

The team has significant experience of complex, high-value mixed use schemes, from the site acquisition, planning, site set-up, development financing and construction, through to the disposals of the residential units and the commercial space. The correct legal structure to accommodate early marketing of the new homes, whilst retaining flexibility for the design, letting and disposal of the economic interests in the commercial parts, is essential.

We have delivered these structures at short notice in order to accommodate foreign exhibition deadlines.

On 22 July 2021, the UK Government implemented the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Regulations 2021 (the “Regulations”). From 11 November 2021, the Regulations require registered persons of all Care Quality Commission (“CQC”) registered care homes (which provide accommodation together with nursing or personal care), including the registered manager, to ensure that a person does not enter the indoor premises of a care home unless they have been fully vaccinated.

Who will be required to have the vaccine and by when?

Whilst certain exemptions do apply, essentially, the Regulations require any employees, agency workers or other contractors, who may be engaged to enter a relevant care home, to be fully vaccinated by 11 November 2021. To comply, this means that affected individuals will need to have had their first vaccination on or before 16 September 2021.

Are there exemptions from having the vaccine?

From 11 November 2021, CQC registered persons are under an obligation to secure that no unvaccinated person enters the care home unless:

1. they are a resident of the care home;
2. they are able to provide evidence that they should not be vaccinated due to a clinical reason;
3. it is reasonably necessary for them to provide emergency assistance in the premises;
4. it is reasonably necessary for them to provide urgent maintenance assistance with respect to the premises;
5. the individual is attending the premises in the execution of their duties as a member of the emergency services;
6. the individual is a friend or relative of a resident;
7. the individual is visiting a resident who is dying;
8. it is reasonably necessary for the individual to provide comfort or support to a resident in relation to their bereavement following the death of a friend or relative; or
9. the individual is under the age of 18.

Visitors can demonstrate their vaccination records using the NHS COVID Pass service either via the NHS App, the NHS website or the NHS COVID Pass letter.

It is important to note that those who are medically exempt will not have to be vaccinated and, similarly, any visitors of care home residents will also be excluded from the new requirements.

What happens if employees do not have the vaccine by the deadline?

As it will not be legal for employees or workers to continue their normal duties on the care home premises until both vaccinations have been received, employers should start to consider and implement procedures to manage staff who do not have both vaccines by the implementation date. It is best practice to involve staff in this preparation.

The relevant Government guidance (here) (“Guidance”) emphasises that employers should explore all options available to staff who do not have proof of the vaccine and do not fall within an exemption. This may involve redeployment to alternative roles, such as those without direct contact with residents, or a temporary cessation of duties. Whilst paid or unpaid leave cannot be a long-term solution, as the Regulations do not have a time limit, this may be considered appropriate where a worker has simply not yet completed the full vaccination course by 11 November 2021 (but intends to do so) or where there are delays in obtaining evidence of medical exemption.

Alternatively, the Guidance also makes it clear that, as long as the employer follows a fair process, the Regulations may provide a fair reason for dismissal. Steps to consider before taking a decision to dismiss are helpfully outlined in the Guidance. It is unlikely that the dismissal will be considered fair in circumstances where the employee or worker is waiting to get their vaccine. However, it may be appropriate where an individual outright refuses to get the vaccine and alternatives to dismissal have been properly explored with them in advance.

Importantly, the Guidance also clarifies that employers will be protected from discrimination claims on the grounds of age, disability, religion or belief and will not breach the Equality Act 2010 on these grounds if they are following the Regulations. However, it will still be crucial that employers follow a fair procedure to ensure that the dismissal is carried out in a fair and non-discriminatory way (even where an employee does not have two years’ service). This protection does not extend to allegations of discrimination on the grounds of race, sex, sexual orientation, pregnancy and maternity, gender reassignment, marriage or civil partnership.

Judicial Review

The Regulations clearly place significant requirements on care workers. As a result, it is perhaps unsurprising that, on 9 September 2021, two care workers issued judicial review proceedings. Judicial review can be sought to challenge the lawfulness of a decision made by a public body. In this case, the proceedings challenge the mandatory vaccination requirement implemented by the Regulations.

The claim is reported to have been brought on five grounds, including that the Regulations are disproportionate, incompatible with laws prohibiting the enforcement of mandatory vaccines and the European Convention on Human Rights, and that they interfere with the public’s right to “bodily integrity”. There are also concerns that they will lead to shortages in care workers.

Whilst it is unlikely that any decision will be given before 11 November 2021, if the proceedings are successful, the Regulations may be deemed unlawful and amended insofar as is necessary.

What should CQC regulated employers be doing?

At this point in time, the Regulations remain in force and employers should proceed on the basis that they will remain in force on 11 November 2021. As such, employers should ensure that they:

• Consider adopting a written vaccination policy, including timescales in which employees may be redeployed after 11 November 2021 in order obtain the vaccine if they haven’t already done so.
• Review their privacy notices and data protection policies to ensure that they are transparent as to any personal data that will be processed to comply with the Regulations.
• Liaise with their workforce between the publication of the Guidance, and the implementation of the vaccination requirement on 11 November 2021.
• From 11 November 2021:
  1. keep up-to-date records of staff vaccination or exemption statuses of staff members and visitors; and
  2. complete a risk assessment for those who are exempt from vaccination to evaluate the potential risk to the spread of COVID-19 caused by unvaccinated but exempt members of staff entering the care home.

We will monitor the judicial review proceedings and circulate an update should the position for care homes change. In the meantime, employers are strongly advised to familiarise themselves with the Guidance.

This article is for information purposes only and is not a substitute for legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. 

This article, authored by Andrew Oldland QC and barrister Nicola Canty, from the Firm’s Marine Regulatory team, has been featured in the July edition of Marine and Maritime Gazette.

The Marine Management Organisation (MMO) issues ‘marine licences’ under Part 4 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 (MCAA). A marine licence is required for licensable activities taking place up to the mean spring high-tide water mark. Licensable activities include the construction, alteration or improvement of any works in or over the sea, or on or under the seabed (section 66(1)(7)) and the removal of any substance or object from the seabed (section 66(1)(8)); this will include most marine maintenance activities unless being carried out by or on behalf of a harbour authority.

Licences

In England and Wales it is possible to submit a single application for a 10 year licence that applies to multiple sites where the activities applied for are generally low impact maintenance activities. Applicants should be able to justify why the proposed region can be considered an ecologically coherent area.

A regional licence may be suitable for maintenance to moorings, pontoons and minor beach re-profiling which are not covered by the Marine licensing (Exempted Activities) Order 2011 or Articles 25 (Mooring and aids to navigation), 25A (pontoons) and 27 (launching of vessels) of MCAA. However, a regional licence would not be suitable for licensable dredging activities and a single site marine licence application should be submitted in those circumstances.

The intention is that a regional licence application would reduce the administrative burden, time and cost of applying for numerous licences separately. The various advisory bodies would also have the opportunity to address their concerns and propose conditions to the proposed licence in an efficient manner that would make best use of the resources available.

As with single site applications, a Habitats regulations assessment is generally required and the effects of the project on marine conservation zones must be considered. Other required considerations would include the Marine Policy Statement and any Marine Plans in place, in addition to the Water Framework Directive (though a simple screening assessment may be sufficient to satisfy this requirement). In addition, depending on the scale of the regional licence application, it is likely that a sustainability appraisal would be necessary.

Process
A pre-application consultation meeting with statutory consultees such as Cefas, Natural England and the Environment Agency is invaluable. With a larger scale, multi-site application, the opportunity to engage with statutory consultees in the pre-application consultation stage is a useful opportunity to ensure the final application contains sufficient information to address any concerns raised and to enable a discussion of suitable licencing conditions.  It is also possible to obtain advice from Natural England’s Discretionary Advice Service (DAS); Natural Resource Wales (NRW) provides similar pre-application advice, though NRW does not charge for their input.  Regional licence applications must be advertised locally and the application must be available for public consultation for 28 days.  The MMO would forward any public responses for the applicant to comment.

Michelmores has recently advised on the first regional marine licence issued by the MMO. Our marine team, led by Andrew Oldland QC, is able to advise on all aspects of obtaining, opposing and implementing marine licences, including emergency, fast-track, single site, and regional marine licences.

This article, authored by Andrew Oldland QC and barrister Nicola Canty, from the Firm’s Marine Regulatory team, has been featured in the December edition of Marine and Maritime Gazette.

Current conservation legislation protects a number of marine wildlife species from intentional or reckless disturbance, taking, harming or killing, and possession or sale of some species. A marine wildlife licence must be obtained if you intend to carry out an activity that would affect a UK or European protected species and is otherwise prohibited under conservation legislation.

Protected species include certain bird species, marine turtles, dolphins, porpoises and whales, seals, and certain species of fish and invertebrates. The legislation in this area can be complex and is spread over a number of different statutes. In general, the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 are the main pieces of legislation for protecting marine wildlife in the England and Wales inshore region.

The Marine Management Organisation (MMO) licenses activity in English water and Welsh offshore waters, with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) licensing activities in the Welsh inshore waters. In England and Wales, the police and the MMO are the main wildlife enforcement bodies. Wildlife offences are currently punishable by a fine or up to 6 month’s imprisonment for the most serious offences.

Is a wildlife licence required?

One example of when a wildlife licence may be required relates to marine development projects that involve piling activities which would result in temporary disturbance to cetaceans from the noise emitted during construction.  Where a European Protected Species is found on site once a project is already underway, this may lead to delays whilst a wildlife licence is applied for, so as to avoid committing a criminal offence.

A wildlife licence would not normally be required if there is a negligible risk of an offence being committed, or if the MMO considers that the proposed mitigation would render any such risk negligible. The MMO will often seek to work with applicants to introduce measures within the marine licence itself to mitigate against any potential impact on the relevant wildlife concerned.

In any event, a wildlife licence will only be issued as a last resort. Licences will usually only be issued where there is no satisfactory alternative and the activity concerned would not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species at a ‘favourable conservation status’.

The MMO currently states that wildlife licence applications take 13 weeks to process. During this time, the MMO would consult with Natural England, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) or both, as appropriate. It should also be noted that there is no appeals mechanism in relation to decisions over the grant of wildlife licences.  If an applicant or an objector wanted to challenge the grant or refusal of a wildlife licence then they would have to challenge the decision by way of judicial review.

The road ahead

Potential applicants should also be aware that the Law Commission has recently completed its wildlife law project to review and reform the ‘complex patchwork of overlapping and sometimes conflicting provisions’ of wildlife law. On 10 November 2015 the Law Commission published a draft Wildlife Bill.  The intention is to provide a unified licensing regime to reduce complexity for prospective applicants.

This draft Bill contains several significant changes to the status quo which would rationalise much of UK wildlife law in one place, but also intends to ensure that the UK is meeting its obligations under international conventions such as the Bonn Convention (the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals) and the Bern Convention (the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats), as well as the European Wild Birds and Habitats Directives.

Click here to read the full publication.

The European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) is the main fund for the European Union’s maritime and fisheries policies for 2014-2020. It is one of five European Structural and Investment Funds intended to complement each other in order to deliver growth and jobs based recovery in the EU.

The scheme is intended to help fishermen in the transition to sustainable fishing, support coastal communities in diversifying their economies, finance projects that create new jobs and improve quality of life along European coasts and make it easier for applicants to access financing.

The EMFF replaces the former European Fisheries Fund (EFF) and has a €6.4bn budget, with additional co-funding provided by Member States who administer the fund locally. It is administered in England by the Marine Management Organisation on behalf of Defra and was opened for applications in January 2016 on a phased basis.

The EMFF: 2014 – 2020

The UK’s Operational Programme incorporates the ‘Union Priorities’ as defined in the EMFF Regulation, aiming to:

1. support adaption to the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) reform to ensure a sustainable and innovative fishing sector (28%)
2. support innovation to help expand aquaculture whilst improving the environmental impact of the sector (8%)
3. support the implementation of the control, inspection and enforcement system of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), in addition to data collection and management (40%)
4. support community-led local development strategies to help fisheries and aquaculture-dependent communities to diversify their economies and bring added value to their fishing activities (6%)
5. foster marketing and production in the sector (11%)
6. implement the Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) and support an effective marine planning process (3%)
7. there is an additional budget of €12,528,452 (4%) for technical assistance to ensure the efficient administration of the EU funding

The budget itself has been proportionately allocated based on country size. The UK has been awarded €243 million (increasing to a total budget for the UK of almost €310 million following the national co-funding contribution). The UK’s allocation is then further subdivided between England (€92.1 million), Scotland (€107.7 million), Northern Ireland (€23.5 million) and Wales (€19.7 million).

Applications for funding

In the UK, funding will be provided on a phased basis with all of the remaining parts of the scheme opened by the end of 2016. At present there is currently €33 million available in Phase 1. However, the full scheme guidance is already available so that applicants may consider how to apply for funding that is opened later in the scheme.

Phase 1 provides for 6 different grant areas including projects for fishing vessel energy improvements, investment on board fishing vessels, improvements to shore-based facilities, partnerships and information sharing support, projects relating to the marine environment and inland fishing and, finally, support for aquaculture, processing and marketing.

The application process will vary dependent on the amount of funding requested, with applications over £100,000 requiring a panel review involving submission deadlines. However, for projects requesting funding under this limit, applications can be made any time and are assessed on a regular basis.

Ultimately a project must be in line with the overall aims of the EMFF to be considered for funding and each activity should be reviewed against the lists published on the MMO website (for the selection criteria click here).

Those operating within the fisheries, inland waters, aquaculture and maritime sectors are encouraged to take full advantage of the available funding to support growth in the industry and ensure continued, sustainable development.

This article, authored by barrister Nicola Canty, from the Firm’s Marine Regulatory team, has been featured in the September edition of Marine and Maritime Gazette.

Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) are relatively new additions to other existing Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in the UK, such as European marine sites (Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas), Ramsar sites and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). Their designation is intended to help the UK meet its international commitments, such as establishing an ecologically coherent and well-managed network of MPAs.

On 21 November 2013, the UK Government designated 27 MCZs in the English inshore (within 12nm) and English and Welsh offshore waters (beyond 12nm), with 5 offshore MCZs covering 8000km2 and 22 inshore MCZs covering around 2000km2 of inshore waters. A second tranche of 23 MCZs (which would cover approximately 10,800km2), was consulted upon in early 2015, with the results due in January 2016. A third consultation on the final tranche of potential MCZ sites is expected in 2016.

The purpose of MCZs is to protect rare, threatened and representative marine flora and fauna, geology and geomorphology.  Different levels of protection are expected to be applied to each MCZ, from the least interventionist measure of voluntary controls up to highly regulated ‘reference areas’, where no damaging activities are allowed. No reference areas have yet been designated.

Obligations on public authorities

The Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 (MCAA) created powers and imposes obligations on the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (and other public authorities such as Local Planning Authorities in the coastal area, and Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities (IFCAs) in relation to fisheries within the 10 IFCA districts from 0 to 6 nm). Under s125 MCAA, the MMO has a duty to exercise its functions to further, or where it that is not possible, to least hinder, the conservation objectives stated for the MCZ in question.

In determining marine licence applications, under s126 MCAA the MMO is also required to consider whether the act is capable of affecting (other than insignificantly) the protected features of the MCZ or any ecological or geomorphological process on which the conservation of any protected feature of an MCZ is dependant. If the MMO identifies such as risk, it must notify the relevant conservation body and will usually have to wait 28 days to determine the licence application to allow conservation advice and guidance to be provided. Conservation advice is provided by Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) in relation to inshore and offshore waters respectively.

Overview of the MMO’s MCZ assessment procedure

In order to meet this obligation under s126 MCAA, the MMO has introduced a MCZ assessment process into its marine licensing decision making procedures. For complex projects it is expected that the majority of the information required for this assessment would be provided in pre-application. The process introduced by the MMO involves three sequential stages:

1. Screening: all marine licence applications are screened to determine whether the licensable activity is taking place within or near an area being put forward or already designated as an MCZ. If so, the MMO would then consider whether the activity was capable of affecting the protected features of the MCZ as set out in s126 MCAA.
2. Stage 1 assessment: the MMO considers whether there is a significant risk of the activity hindering the conservation objectives stated for the MCZ, and whether the MMO would be able to exercise its functions to further the conservation objectives of the site. If not, the MMO would have to consider whether there were any other means of proceeding with the activity which would create a substantially lower risk.
3. Stage 2 assessment: The MMO will then consider whether the public benefit of the activity clearly outweighs the risk of damage to the environment. If so, the MMO would then consider whether they are satisfied that the applicant will undertake measures to provide equivalent environmental benefit. If not, the application would be rejected.

MCZs proposed in the third tranche, but as yet undesignated, would not trigger this MCZ assessment process. However, evidence supporting the proposal of an MCZ site (together with its proposed features and proposed conservation objectives) would still be considered relevant by the MMO in its decision making.

The Legal professions of England and Wales are steeped in tradition. The long history of the law here is marked in the buildings, attire and institutions which form the legal system. Any law student can attest to the cases and statutes dating back hundreds of years that form the bedrock of the law itself. With so many constants, it is easy for the uninitiated to think of the law as a solid thing of black and white.

But, as those of you reading this will no doubt be aware, is not the case. Whilst the core principles and legislation endure, the law we deal with day to day is a changeable, ever-shifting web of statute, case law and procedure – the Jackson Reforms, the recent decision in Mitchell and annual changes to personal taxation to name a few. Practising lawyers are on the sharp edge of this change, and it is vital that we keep up with developments or risk exposing ourselves to negligence.

For a trainee, this job is both more difficult and more time consuming. We not only have to learn the law applicable to the seat we are in, but we must do so whilst keeping abreast of developments to it. In my experience, this is compounded by frequently being asked to undertake detailed, highly specific research into sometimes quite complicated law – it is often my initial research that forms the basis of the work of more senior lawyers in the teams I work in. If they had to waste time checking poorly informed notes, I would not be popular!

It does not end there! You also need to understand your clients and referrers, how they operate, the markets they work within, economic and political changes and how they impact upon your work area. For some of us this might also mean medical knowledge or an ability to empathise with clients facing enormous personal upheavals. It might even mean becoming well versed in something completely new to you. Previous posts on this blog have cited farming and the timber industry; I have done significant research into charity administration and care homes.  Whatever it is, as a lawyer, you are likely to need to develop a good deal of non-legal knowledge too.

Those of you glad to leave law school behind or looking forward to doing so may well be disheartened at this news… but don’t despair!

Our generation has the greatest access to information in the history of humanity. The internet makes finding material easy, and legal information is no exception. I have found a number of free websites (such as justice.gov.uk) that give access to the law, as well as the paid-for legal information providers that I use almost every day.  Social media platforms such as Twitter and LinkedIn can provide instant, specific news to your smartphone. Set them up right, and you will get a constant stream of current, relevant information specific tailored to your needs. Seriously, this is a game-changer.

Get used to keeping yourself up-to-date. Having a finger on the pulse of the legal world and understanding your clients is essential for the modern lawyer. It will also make your life as a junior lawyer that bit easier.

On Friday 5 August 2016 Michelmores welcomed a group of 50 Chinese business managers and directors to its London office, for a series of talks and workshops focusing on the theme of Chinese investment into the UK.

The visit, supported by the government’s UK Trade and Investment department (UKTI), was led by Michelmores’ Managing Partner Malcolm Dickinson and Head of the Firm’s China Desk Lily Shen and provided an overview of the current UK economic climate and an update on the impact of Brexit to date.

The talks also analysed some of the largest Chinese investments into the UK in recent months, including Hinkley Point nuclear power plant, Sichuan Guodong Construction Group’s investment into Sheffield town centre and the purchase of Wolves and Aston Villa football clubs.

In addition, Michelmores provided industry-focused updates for real estate, led by Partner Paul Paling, technology led by Partner Tom Torkar, UK mergers and acquisitions led by Partner Ian Binnie. Partner Richard Cobb also shared insight into entrepreneurship in the UK, and Lily Shen summarised the key steps to consider for Chinese corporates and individuals thinking about investing in the UK for the first time.

The group were visiting on a week-long trip to the UK to understand more about the UK economy and the opportunities available to investors.

Amongst the Delegation were representatives from the finance and investment, manufacturing, and technology sectors in China, including Taiping Insurance, China Minsheng Bank, CEFC International Limited, Perfect World Network Technology and many more. As part of the tour, the Delegation also visited accountants BDO and UBS bank.

Following the seminar, Michelmores invited the China Delegation to the Royal Automobile Club in Pall Mall for dinner and to experience a taste of traditional British culture.

Michelmores advises a number of Chinese clients across a range of sectors. The Firm also supports YangTze Law, London’s first wholly Chinese-owned law firm, working with Chinese corporates investing in the UK and Europe as well as private individuals.

As a second year student studying law I was fortunate to be able to meet lawyers from Michelmores prior to applying to the Vacation Scheme. I applied knowing that Michelmores has a friendly and approachable culture which is something that I think is necessary when wanting to work somewhere. I would definitely recommend to those who are interested in applying to Michelmores to try and get involved with open days and law fairs as much as possible! It shows that you are really interested in the firm and helps you learn information about it that you can’t find on the website.

The application process was quite straightforward consisting of an application form, followed by a video interview and finally an interview with HR at the Firm’s Exeter office. I was thrilled to be accepted onto the Summer Vacation Scheme after this.

The week is really well organised and very busy – you never feel like you have nothing to do! I was allocated to the Clinical Negligence team which is part of the Private Client department. Personally I have done most of my work experience in commercial departments, therefore it was refreshing to be doing work that was so different. The members of the team all get involved with giving you an insight into the work they do which was very interesting. There was never a moment where I would just be reading through files to pass the time. I was given new tasks regularly on cases that they were working on at the time and so was able to feel involved and that I was actually helpful to the solicitors. The case load in the department is also extremely diverse and this meant that every day I was doing something different, ranging from attending client meetings to drafting proof of evidence documents. I enjoyed every minute spent in the department and would definitely recommend it!

Another element of the Vacation Scheme that is very helpful for aspiring solicitors is the talks that the Firm organises each day from a different department.  This enabled us to get an insight into areas we weren’t able to experience and ask any questions we wanted to. We were also invited to a breakfast talk from Malcolm Dickinson, the Managing Partner.

As with every Vacation Scheme, there are also assessments that we had to do throughout the week. We were set a verbal reasoning test, a written assessment, an article discussion, and last but by no means least an interview with a partner and a member of HR. The interview was an hour and a half and really tested your commercial awareness and competency. We were also set a presentation on the first day which we would present to ten solicitors on our final day and worked on this throughout the week. I think the experience that we were able to gain from these tasks is invaluable and I learnt a lot about the Firm.

Although the week was challenging, we were all made to feel part of the team. The Firm organised a networking lunch with the trainees and also informal drinks one evening to help us get to know more about Michelmores and its people. It was easy to ask any questions that you wanted to – everyone was very happy to help!

To sum up, the week gave me an excellent insight into what working as a solicitor at Michelmores is like and helped me develop my commercial awareness skills further which in the long term will be invaluable for me. I would highly recommend the Vacation Scheme at Michelmores.