iLegal: (iPad, iPhone: £39.99)
Need to get the latest information of legislation right now? This app claims to give you access to the revised text of almost all UK, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales legislation, as well as Acts of Parliament of Great Britain and English Parliament. You don’t even need signal as most of the information can be accessed offline.

Remote Desktop: (iPhone, iPad: Free)
We’ve all had the sinking feeling – the moment you realise that the file you desperately need is sitting on the desktop of your office computer and you’re miles away. With this app, you can connect to your Windows workstation computer and see all of your files and programs.

Dragon Dictation: (iPhone, iPad: Free)
Need a portable court reporter? This app allows you to speak and instantly see your text. It is reportedly five times faster than typing on a keyboard.

Court Search: (Android: £9.99)
This app gives you access to details of every Court in England and Wales. Get access to addresses, maps, contact details, as well as live Crown Court details and daily lists for the High Court.

Stanza: (iPhone, iPad: Free)
Need to brush up on your case law? Use this app to download from over 100,000 books and periodicals to read on your phone or tablet. Or if you already have a selection of electronic books, you can read them using Stanza as well. You can change elements like font size and line spacing to customise and best suit your needs.

CrimeLine Law: (iPad, iPhone: £2.49)
This app puts the Bailii database in your pocket, allowing quick and easy access to thousands of cases and statutes. It also allows you to bookmark cases or legislation for quick reference.

Black’s Law Dictionary: (iPhone, iPad, Android: $54.99)
Though largely consisting of American legal terms, Black’s Law Dictionary is still the world’s most cited law book. It contains more than 45,000 terms, alternative spellings and even an audio pronunciation for those hard-to-say terms.

OfficeTime: (iPhone, iPad, Android: $7.99)
Have trouble calculating your out of office time? This app can track your hours and expenses. You can even sync the app with OfficeTime for Mac or PC (sold separately) for simplicity.

Instapaper: (iPhone, iPad, Android: $4.99)
Save web pages for offline reading.

TrialPad 2.1.4: (iphone, ipad: $89.90)
This is a handy presentation tool developed specifically for the legal profession for use in trails and hearings. You can organise, manage, annotate, and store documents and video.

Photo by Judy Breck

Bookmark It

No related posts.

To be precise, at the end of November 2011, there were 125,473 PC-holders; a rise of 462 on the previous month and of over 4,500 on the same date in 2010. The total number on the roll now stands at 163,108.

Perhaps even more pertinently for those seeking a career in law in 2012, Deloitte’s Business Survey noted in December 2011 that incomes for firms in the legal sector were rising sharply – a reasonably reliable indicator of a growing jobs market and an encouraging sign for anyone looking to grow and develop a career in law.

Against this cautiously optimistic backdrop, we asked Steve McNally of Equality Law (www.equalitylaw.co.uk) to give an overview of who is recruiting across the sector in 2012.

“All the usual suspects will be recruiting in 2012, from the ‘Magic Circle’ and solicitors with national networks, across to those firms who are regional specialists – and don’t forget the smaller single location firms. In fact, right now, there are over 1,000 firms publicly advertising their training contracts to graduates, as well as more than 200 Barrister sets offering pupilage. It doesn’t stop there, obviously – there still remains a large number of Workplacement Schemes and Paralegal positions available, so the legal fraternity must be one of the few sectors that can look forward to this year with a comparative confidence and optimism.”

“However, I think we must caveat this encouraging big picture by stressing that competition for places remains as high as ever, which is why people coming into the legal profession must remember that law has many different avenues, not all of which are right for everyone. So candidates must be careful to choose the path that’s right for them. This sector is populated by an immense variety of firms and barrister sets, each of which can differ quite widely, not just in terms of location and clientbase, but also working culture and, of course, legal specialism.”

Wider opportunities
Inevitably the main focus in 2012 will be on finding work in law firms and barristers’ chambers for school and undergraduate students. Big name firms such as Ashurst, Berwin Leighton Paisner, Eversheds, Herbert Smith, Latham & Watkins, Linklaters, Macfarlanes, Simmons & Simmons, Weil Gotshal & Manges, Ashurt and Winston & Strawn LLP are all actively recruiting – and present a good starting place from which to ‘work down’ if you’re a prospective candidate.

More diverse candidates
Interestingly – and slightly outside the ‘mainstream’ search for jobs – there’s been a growing movement in the legal profession to create a more diverse workforce. For 2012, this has led to a large number of diversity projects and access schemes, designed to ensure that law is a possible career for every member of society. Three of the more notable programmes – and law firm participants – are detailed below.

Social Mobility Foundation (SMF)
This refreshingly innovative charity seeks to place high-achieving A-level students from low income backgrounds in placements with major private and public sector institutions. Geoffrey Vos QC, chairman of the group, says the SMF tries to “find ways of bridging the gap between clever students from poor backgrounds becoming interested in achieving a high-level career, and actually getting into that high-level career”. Sponsors include top law firms such as Clifford Chance, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and Linklaters.

Black Lawyers’ Directory (BLD)
BLD was formed in 2006 to promote diversity within the legal profession and provide a forum for networking. It currently has two initiatives for young people within its Legal Gateway Scheme. Law and non-law undergraduates benefit from the Legal Launch Pad programme. The selected students attend various training sessions that include mock interviews and at least one week’s work experience at a sponsoring organisation. Sponsors of the Legal Gateway Programme include: A&O, Beachcroft, Berwin Leighton Paisner, Clifford Chance, DLA Piper, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, No5 Chambers, Olswang, Shoosmiths, Slaughter and May and White & Case. The selected students attend various training sessions that include mock interviews and at least one week’s work experience at a sponsoring organisation.

Opening Doors, Breaking down Barriers
In April 2011 a government-initiated, social mobility initiative entitled “Opening Doors, Breaking down Barriers” was announced. Allen & Overy was the first firm to sign up to it, promising to offer internships (or work placement places) to young people from deprived backgrounds.

Despite the economic outlook, there’s still great opportunity to carve a career in the legal profession – though as previously noted the competition for places is, as ever, fierce. Yes, law is changing and arguably faces more change than it has seen for centuries – but it continues to be one of the UK’s largest employers in terms of the professional services. Whether 2012 takes us to a natural optimum of numbers that can be employed in this particular decade remains to be seen.

Bookmark It

Related posts:

1. Legal Admin Jobs – A Guide
2. Trainee Legal Secretary Jobs – Getting Your First Job
3. Legal Jobs – London

Read the full article on the Guardian website.

Photo by Daniel Catt

Bookmark It

Related posts:

1. About Legal Trainee Jobs
2. Employment Law Solicitor
3. Newly Qualified Solicitor Jobs – Getting your First Job

This is a place where laws already exist but do not necessarily apply to the new technological world. If the rule of law is to catch up with social media, its enforcers must be willing to explore unfamiliar territory.

Without doubt the biggest problem facing those who wish to enforce the law is jurisdiction. The internet is home to more than two billion users – the figure is likely to be much higher counting families, children and students etc, who share accounts. Geographically, internet users come from everywhere. Internet penetration – by percentage of population – is highest in the United States (78.3%), followed by Oceania (60.1%) and Europe (58.3%).

The number of internet users by continent or region, however, is highest in Asia, where some 922 million people, just 23.8% of the local population, have access to the internet. This figure represents 44% of the global share of internet users, ahead of Europe (22.7%), North America (13%), Central/South America and the Caribbean (10.3%), Africa (5.7%), the Middle East (3.3%) and Oceania (1%). Thus, the region with the second highest internet penetration rate has the smallest share of global internet users.
Legal systems vary worldwide.

The problem with the ‘worldwide’ nature of the web is that all of these regions are subject to different laws. This would not in itself be a major problem were it not for social media interaction on a global scale. People on the internet tend to mingle, so cultures, content and legal systems very often clash. The issue was highlighted in 2006 when La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l’antisémitisme (LICRA) sued Yahoo! and Yahoo! France for allowing French users to access Nazi material. Ordered to remove the content by the French court, Yahoo! was afforded personal jurisdiction by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In effect, this meant that Yahoo! was not duty-bound to remove the content under US law; the French Court had no jurisdiction.

The LICRA case did not intend to permit social media users to flout the rule of law online; on the contrary, users remain subject to the laws of the land but perhaps only their land. The internet is global but most laws are local. The issue of jurisdiction in social media lawsuits has yet to be fully explored, however and it is entirely possible that cases will arise in coming years that shape the argument in one direction or another, perhaps risking the globalisation of social media. In the meantime, individuals and companies will continue to struggle to uphold certain laws against users who are subject to completely different legal systems.

Another legal implication of the social media revolution is defamation, particularly libel, but also slander on certain multimedia-based social networking sites. Defamation cases involving websites are nothing new, but lawsuits involving social media are on the rise. According to industry experts, online libel cases in the UK doubled between 2010 and 2011, when a total of 86 cases progressed to court. The situation is likely to worsen as social media usage increases over the coming years.

The main problem with libel and social media, from a company’s perspective at least, is that enforcement can do more harm than good. Social media communities expect a certain freedom online, whether justified or not. Bringing claims against libellous social media users can be the virtual equivalent of shooting oneself in the foot. There is often no good reason to pursue libel action against social media users. The most appropriate and effective course of action is usually to retort in some form or another (the more creative the better). At the very least, a company ought to consider refuting comments via a press release before considering legal action but ignoring defamation or denouncing it in good humour is almost always the best policy.

The situation is somewhat different for defamed individuals. In one particularly remarkable case, Orlando Figes, an esteemed professor in Russian history, was exposed for committing a quite unremarkable offence. He had dabbled in a spot of ‘astroturfing’.

Astroturfing in this context refers to posting fake comments or reviews about a person, product or place etc, usually with the intention of increasing or destroying its reputation. Figes had defamed historical works published by his rivals by posting spurious reviews on Amazon. Although the professor did so anonymously, Rachel Polonsky, one of the defamed individuals targeted by Figes, tracked down the miscreant historian and demanded justice.

After threatening Polonsky with legal action – libel, ironically – Figes came clean, admitting that he had criticised rivals’ work in order to promote his own. Astroturfing, however, was not vanquished by Figes’ confession. Libel remains a serious threat to all individuals and businesses online and social media is the perfect breeding ground for internet users who defame others for whatever reason.

Jurisdiction and defamation are just two of the legal issues threatening the development of social media. Copyright infringement is another serious concern, as it has been online for more than a decade. As with libel and slander, copyright is at the mercy of jurisdiction. If two conflicting legal systems go head to head, the tangible will almost certainly triumph over the virtual. Regional jurisdiction presides for the time being. However, many sites such as Facebook and Twitter employ strict terms and agreements that aim to impose rules pertaining to copyright and defamation, so remedial or punitive measures are often available at the source.

In summary, the social media revolution is still in its infancy. As with all infants, mistakes are made on a frequent basis. The task of individuals and companies is to learn from those mistakes, anticipate others and prepare for the odd tantrum. Social media is growing up, but can the rule of law catch up?

Photo by HonestReporting.com

Bookmark It

Related posts:

1. Media Law Jobs Guide

For more information visit the Legal Week website.

Photo by Susan Barrett Price

Bookmark It

No related posts.

Read the consultation document on the Ministry of Justice website.

Photo by Jofo2005

Bookmark It

No related posts.

Read the full article on the Business Weekly website.

Photo by MarkoPako

Bookmark It

No related posts.

Giving rise to the Employment Law Review, the Cabinet-backed service proposes various changes to laws affecting how people are recruited, fired, managed and so on. Ignoring the point that the Red Tape Challenge provides the perfect cover for legislating through the back door by proposing unfavourable changes in the name of popular opinion, the service could be regarded as an excellent opportunity to improve employment law in the UK.

The issue of employee rights has long proved contentious in the UK, where employment laws have evolved in part to balance the intrinsic inequity between employers and employees.

One of the main goals of the Employment Law Review is to consider changes to The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006, or ‘TUPE’, as it is usually known. TUPE is a complex body of legislation that some might argue is flawed in several areas. Intended to deal with transfers of business, such as in company acquisitions, TUPE serves to protect employee rights by requiring the new employer to take on the acquired company’s employees following a takeover. Under TUPE, the subsumed employees would retain their existing terms and conditions of employment upon joining the new company.

In theory, TUPE addresses the fundamental inequity that was discussed above in the context of business transfers. Rather than be made redundant, employees for the acquired firm simply become part of the new venture. Unfortunately, this can mean a different location, environment and culture. Critics of TUPE have argued that employees are forced into new positions with new firms in fear of losing their jobs. Sometimes, it would seem, redundancy is the preferred option.

A more fundamental problem of TUPE is that the legislation was not drafted as clearly as it perhaps ought to have been. Although intended for business acquisitions, TUPE can apply in other situations. Most notably, a business that wins a contract from a rival firm could be subject to TUPE if the losing company suffers badly from the loss of contract. In some cases, the winning business would be required to take on the loser’s employees in the event of their being made redundant as a result of the transaction. Compensation may also be necessary.

TUPE also precludes the transferee (the company being taken over by another firm) from entering negotiations with employee representatives. Only after the takeover has been completed is the transferee able to discuss redundancy, but by this stage, employees may already be compromised by the transfer. Employee representatives are also denied the opportunity to discuss alternatives to redundancy, such as redeployment. The result is often one of over-employment; too many employees exist for too few positions. There is little room for uncertainty when it comes to employee rights. However, any proposed changes to TUPE have yet to be confirmed.

Review of dismissal laws
The Employment Law Review has also proposed changes for the way in which employees are dismissed. The previous administration was criticised for making it too difficult for employers to terminate the contracts of workers who were deemed not to be performing to a certain standard. Business Secretary, Vince Cable, therefore, has suggested helping companies by requiring that all claims of unfair dismissal be initially dealt with by the Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS), which is a Government body. The measure would seek to restrict the number of claims leading to employment tribunals, thereby making it easier for firms to hire and fire staff.

The implications of feeding all claims through ACAS are likely to be considerable in the context of employee rights, but employers ought to welcome any move that makes it more difficult for workers to claim unfair dismissal. The measure was proposed as part of an overhaul of the UK’s employment tribunal structure, which has been the subject of other fundamental changes to date, including the introduction of tribunal claim fees (to be paid by the dismissed worker). The government also hopes to see greater use of mediation services prior to claims being made by aggrieved employees. Despite Vince Cable’s reassurances to the contrary, these changes have been designed purely for the benefit of employers.

To date, the Employment Law Review has introduced far less than it has proposed, but the consultation’s achievements are not without consequence. So far, the review has successfully managed to remove the default age of retirement, which ought to benefit older employees who would rather continue working than be nudged a step closer to oblivion by their employers.

The Employment Law Review has proposed the abolition of the Agricultural Minimum Wage (and Agricultural Wages Board), launched a comprehensive review of health and safety legislation, commissioned an independent review of the system that manages absence from work caused by sickness and consulted on various other reforms. Highlighting the focus of the review, the government has also introduced an Employer’s Charter that provides guidance for employers. There has been no suggestion of a similar charter being introduced for employees.

Photo by Olivier Bruchez

Bookmark It

Related posts:

1. Employment Law Solicitor
2. Employment Law Jobs Guide

LVCR is set to come to an end in April, which will put nearly 2,000 jobs across the Channel Islands in doubt.

According to Channel Television, lawyers representing each island will be taking their cases to the English courts to argue the move is discriminatory and a breach of European law.

The UK Treasury announced its intention to end LVCR in October and caught the Channel Islands off guard. LVCR allows goods which are worth less than £15 (formerly £18) to be posted from the Channel Islands to the UK VAT-free.

In April, when this ends, up to 2,000 jobs in the fulfilment industry will be at risk.

The states of both Guernsey and Jersey have recently announced that they will be carrying out simultaneous legal fights to save the LVCR.

Their arguments state that the UK government has applied EU law improperly by specifically targeting the Channel Islands alone with its LVCR announcement.

Guernsey’s Chief Minister Deputy Lyndon Trott told Channel Television: “All Channel Islanders should receive the news that the governments in both Guernsey and Jersey are eager to ensure that our businesses and our communities are not discriminated against. And it is on that basis that this challenge is being made.”

Each case will be carried out by law officers from both islands and they are both likely to cost around £60,000. They could be concluded in February and Channel Television’s sources have stated that law officers for the Crown in Guernsey believe there is a better than 50% chance of success.

Lawyers are also looking to correct a claim made by the UK Treasury which said that 75% of all VAT losses come from the Channel Islands fulfilment industry. This is a claim that is strongly denied by the governments of both islands.

Picture: RP72

Bookmark It

No related posts.

Paris-based corporate and investment bank Societe Generale (Soc Gen) has announced the appointment of 12 international law firms to its new global panel.

After the conclusion of the panel review, the majority of firms that have been appointed by the French bank are firms that have advised the bank in the past, such as the UK law firm, Clifford Chance.

Other UK law firms included in Soc Gen’s new panel are Simmons & Simmons, Hogan Lovells and Norton Rose.

Allen & Overy and Herbert Smith have also been appointed, as have US law firms Jones Day, Shearman & Shearman and Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker.

International law firm Baker & McKenzie, the French-based firm Gide Loyrette Nouel and the legal arm of PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC) have also been announced as members of the panel.

A Soc Gen spokesperson said in a statement: “These firms have been chosen for their global reach and their international expertise, and are ideally suited to cover the group’s needs worldwide.

“A panel of local law firms will be added to this international panel in all the countries where the group is present.”

Source: Legal Week

Photo: Mohamed Yahya

Bookmark It

Related posts:

1. Legal Jobs – London