Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
Social media network Parler LLC filed an antitrust complaint against Amazon.com Inc on Monday after Amazon banned the service from being hosted on its servers.
In the complaint, which was filed with the US District Court in Seattle, Parler said Amazon Web Services had delivered a “death blow” to its business by suddenly cutting off its web-hosting services on Sunday night. The move followed shortly after Apple and Google removed the Parler app from their mobile stores.
“AWS false claims have made Parler a pariah,” the company said, accusing Amazon of politically motivated hypocrisy and asking the court for a temporary restraining order against Amazon to reverse the decision.
In its own statement, Amazon said that the Parler lawsuit had “no merit”.
"It is clear that there is significant content on Parler that encourages and incites violence against others, and that Parler is unable or unwilling to promptly identify and remove this content, which is a violation of our terms of service," said an Amazon spokesperson. "We made our concerns known to Parler over a number of weeks and during that time we saw a significant increase in this type of dangerous content, not a decrease, which led to our suspension of their services Sunday evening."
In a letter to Parler Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff on Saturday, Amazon Web Services said that it had reported 98 examples to Parler of “posts that clearly encourage and incite violence” in its recent weeks of operation, including several screenshots.
[ymal]
Amazon’s decision to suspend Parler from its services comes amid a widespread social media crackdown on disinformation and violent rhetoric following the 6 January riots where Trump supporters laid siege to the US Capitol building, leaving five dead.
President Trump and several of his most high-profile supporters have been banned indefinitely from Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
When someone is accused of a crime they did not commit they need to act immediately to protect their rights. Innocent people are falsely accused of crimes they did not commit more than the criminal justice system would like to admit and that’s why it’s important to take the following steps when you’ve been falsely accused of a crime:
If you have been falsely accused or charged with a crime, accusation law experts recommend that you contact a criminal defence lawyer as soon as possible. Criminal defense professionals also suggest that you consider:
Reports released by the Innocence Project found that New York, Texas, and Illinois have overturned more wrongful convictions than all other states. The reports concluded that there are problems with the state criminal justice system and that’s why in April 2012 the New York State Attorney General instituted the Conviction Review Bureau (CRB) in the New York Office of Attorney General (OAG). The CRB is a New York State initiative to address the issues related to wrongful convictions by partnering with law enforcement by finding perpetrators while reducing penalisations for those who are innocent.
[ymal]
Understanding what not to do is also an important way to protect yourself from false accusations. When you’re falsely accused of a crime, committing the following acts could harm your case:
If you’ve been falsely accused of a crime, then accusation law experts would urge you to contact experienced criminal defense attorneys today to schedule a free consultation and learn how they can provide support, help clear your name, and collaborate with others to exonerate you while bolstering the capture of the perpetrators.
Realistically speaking, being involved in an accident due to someone else’s fault can be a traumatic experience, especially if you sustain serious injuries. Sometimes, severe and life-threatening injuries can impact your way of life forever as these may cause permanent disabilities such as brain damage, paralysis, or many more.
Fortunately, injured victims in an accident caused by another person’s negligence may avail of some remedies. They’re given by law the right to file a case against the at-fault party and recover compensation for all the damages sustained. But, in doing this, you may need the assistance of a reputable law firm to help you with the legal processes.
If you’re unsure about working with a law firm, below are the reasons you may need to contact one after your accident.
Primarily, a law firm refers to a business entity that was formed and organised by one or more lawyers to engage in the practice of law. Its main services include advising clients about their legal rights and responsibilities and representing them in civil, criminal, or corporate cases and other matters in which legal assistance is sought.
However, depending on the issue, there are many types of law firms to choose from. These can include:
Primarily, a law firm refers to a business entity that was formed and organised by one or more lawyers to engage in the practice of law.
Now that you know what a law firm is all about, the next thing you should learn are the reasons you should work with a law firm after getting involved in an accident. As mentioned, being injured in an accident caused by someone else’s negligent behavior may entitle you with a right to seek compensation against the at-fault party. But, unless you’re a legal professional yourself, you need the assistance of someone in a law firm to help you navigate the legal process.
Here’s what a law firm can do for you after an accident:
One of the most traumatic parts of being an accident victim is the emotional and psychological distress you’ll be facing. With all the things you need to think about such as the pain and suffering, medical bills to pay, lost opportunity to earn a living, and many others, you’ll certainly lose your peace of mind. As a result, you may not know what to do and where to start.
To help get your peace of mind and, eventually, your normal life back, it’s a good idea to contact a reputable law firm to help you. This business entity is composed of experienced personal injury lawyers who can provide you with a personalised legal advice about your situation. They’ll examine the facts of your case and come up with honest, professional, and objective advice about your claim and what steps to take next. Also, when you work with a law firm, you can be confident that you’ll get answers to all your questions. You can get a list of all your legal options to help you choose the right one for you.
In addition to getting legal advice, you may also need to contact a law firm after an accident so that you can ask help in proving who’s at fault for your injuries. Typically, when you file an injury claim against the other party, you still need to establish the fault of such person so that you can recover the right amount of compensation for your injuries. However, all parties involved will more likely attempt to shift the blame to the other person, making it hard to determine who is liable for your injuries. This is where a certified lawyer from a law firm comes to the rescue.
To help get your peace of mind and, eventually, your normal life back, it’s a good idea to contact a reputable law firm to help you.
An experienced personal injury lawyer has the necessary skills and resources that can help you sift through the evidence to identify who was at fault for the accident and your injuries. For instance, they can do the following to establish the liability of the other party involved:
After getting these things done, your lawyer will now become more committed to defend your right to compensation by building a strong argument on your behalf.
Aside from filing a personal injury claim, you may also be able to file an insurance settlement claim against the other party’s insurance company. This is especially true if your injuries were caused by their negligence or carelessness. However, just like other businesses, most insurance companies are also concerned about making more money. They have skilled insurance adjusters whose task is to reduce your settlement or even deny your whole claim, depending on the circumstances.
Thus, if you have no experience in dealing with an insurance company before, then you may find it difficult to protect your interests and get the full value of your claim. This is one of the reasons you may need to contact a reliable law firm and hire a personal injury lawyer. Generally, most of these professionals from a good law firm can assist you in the following manner:
As you can see, working with a great law firm whose lawyers are highly skilled in handling insurance claims and negotiating fair settlements can be crucial to the success of your case.
If you have no experience in dealing with an insurance company before, then you may find it difficult to protect your interests and get the full value of your claim.
Another essential reason you may need to consult a law firm after an accident is to help you figure out the true cost of your injuries. While some insurance companies may do everything they can to pay you as little as possible, the personal injury lawyers working in a reputable law firm know exactly how to determine the exact value of your claim and will advise you not to accept any settlement offer which doesn’t cover all your losses.
Generally, a trustworthy lawyer can make sure you recover compensation for all the damages which include medical bills, lost wages, lost capacity to earn, pain and suffering, and many more. They use their knowledge, skills, and experience in determining the full extent of your losses. Thus, if you don’t want to be taken advantage of the insurance company and the at-fault party, make sure you have a legal professional on your side to assist you.
When the negotiations with your insurance company fail in spite of diligent efforts, your legal remedy is to file a personal injury lawsuit claim in court. However, with all the complicated court processes and requirements, you should work with a law firm to help you handle this legal process properly.
Typically, dealing with a personal injury lawsuit can be challenging. From the initial process of preparing the paperwork to filing an appeal in case the judgment is issued against your favor, there are many things to consider from the get-go. For example, you may need to submit all the legal documents within the time limit required in the proper civil court to avoid mistakes.
Hence, to ensure you can expedite the resolution of your case and save you time and money, hire an experienced law firm lawyer to represent you at the trial. Doing so can help you improve your chances of winning the case and maximise your financial recovery.
[ymal]
No matter what the circumstances of your case are, you should contact a law firm after being injured in an accident. Whether it’s a car accident, slip or fall accident, or a workplace accident, you should always let yourself be represented by a legal professional if you want to receive the right amount of compensation for all your injuries.
Therefore, if you want to make sure you’re doing the right legal action after an accident, keep the things mentioned above in mind, and you’re good to go. You’ll have peace of mind knowing your lawyer can protect your rights and interests as an injured victim right from the very beginning.
Chris DeConti, Head of Strategy at Factor, explores the difference between 'old' and 'new' law and how they are highlighted in benchmark reform.
As anyone affected is painfully aware, the discontinuation of LIBOR presents a huge challenge to legal departments of large financial institutions. Most organisations are already making progress against the enormous task of transitioning agreements based on LIBOR to an alternative rate. Spanning millions of impacted financial contracts across a wide range of business areas, these LIBOR projects represent a formidable challenge even to those financial institutions who have successfully managed past mega-projects related to uncleared derivatives, Brexit and others. With this much scale and complexity, the reflexive reaction – throw a mix of in-house and outside counsel at the task – was always going to be grossly inefficient, impractical and risky.
The legal and operational complexity of the task requires the best of ‘old’ law (think expert advisory and market know-how) and the best of ‘new’ law (think process excellence, technology enablement and smart resourcing), without anything getting lost between the two. Successfully bridging these two worlds can not only take the trauma out of LIBOR transition, but also provide a blueprint for optimizing the legal function of the future.
Two things. One, the complexity. It's not just a matter of moving away from LIBOR, a uniformly understood and accepted standard across jurisdictions and types of agreements but moving toward a variety of different alternative rate options, which are still evolving as the market comes to a consensus. Understanding the risks – financial, operational, and legal – requires sophisticated, in-depth experience. Two, the scale. LIBOR has been such an industry standard for so long that decoupling the massive volume of agreements directly and indirectly tied to LIBOR represents a Herculean project management task for any organisation.
Understanding the risks – financial, operational, and legal – requires sophisticated, in-depth experience.
These two challenges work to the respective strengths of old and new law. The old law model of trusted advisors with extensive market knowledge gained from advisory activities across multiple clients is vital in the dynamic and ambiguous context of benchmark reform, where most organisations want to meet, not make the market. The evolving nature of the project exacerbates the scale problem as market uncertainty will condense timelines. This is where the advantages of 'new law' come into their own, with process excellence, project management, technology-enablement and smarter resourcing.
While GCs have proven increasingly receptive to new law, it has generally been in relation to specific, lower complexity bodies of work, separate from old law scope. LIBOR projects present the most urgent and compelling opportunity for old law and new law approaches to be integrated, but doing so requires translating between two very different dialects of legal work:
Without paying due attention to this phenomenon, expert old law lawyers and new law practitioners (or in-house program teams) could end up talking past each other.
LIBOR projects present the most urgent and compelling opportunity for old law and new law approaches to be integrated.
In a dynamic and uncertain environment, the movement of work between these worlds needs to be nimble and built into the very core of how they work together, to maximise efficiency, minimise risk and ultimately reach the end of 2021 in one piece. Our experience has taught us to focus translation efforts in two crucial areas: playbooks and the process around them, and governance.
You might think that a movable feast like benchmark reform renders playbooks redundant. After all, aren't these instructions on the treatment for contracts at each stage of the process? If that isn’t fixed, how can they be useful? This would be to misunderstand how powerful these can be as an artefact for translation between the two worlds. But, as with any translation, these take expertise.
A well-designed playbook serves as the bridge between legal advice and implementation. It maps the paths that each contract will take, with the knowledge that these will shift as the market develops. It sets out the touchpoints between advisory and implementation actions in a way that closes every process loop between the two. For example, when a novel issue arises in negotiation, as you can frequently expect from benchmark reform, it isn't enough to simply raise an escalation to an advisory level. Instead, this needs to be reflected in ongoing templates, negotiating guidance and training, to ensure that even ad-hoc advisory becomes part of the collective intelligence of a combined solution.
Strong governance and transparency between advisory and implementation keep the bridge between the two open and active, enabling structured communication between the new and old law components of the transition team and the stakeholders of the organization on a regular, but not intrusive schedule (usually monthly). It also means having insight available on a more frequent basis in the form of weekly directional operation meetings. Finally, close daily monitoring of the actual executing team members means rapid identification and resolution of challenges to the process or specific transactions. Too often, organisations rely on informal working practices and casual communication channels. That might work in the normal flow of day-to-day operations, but not in a complex, dynamic, large-scale event like benchmark reform.
[ymal]
If you’re dealing with benchmark reform, time is running out, but by combining the best of new and old law, with special attention to the translation between the two, you can successfully achieve your goal with less pain.
But this won’t be a one-time benefit. While benchmark reform represents the 'burning platform' for integrating new law and old law approaches, doing so opens new potential for BAU legal work and can form the basis of a modernised vision of legal. Bringing together old law virtues like legal expertise and market know how with new law’s tech-enabled efficiency brings the benefits of new law to much broader categories of more complex work.
Following a change in WhatsApp’s stated international privacy policy, which saw the removal of a passage that allowed users to opt out of sharing WhatsApp account information with parent company Facebook, numerous users have begun to switch to other messaging platforms.
The update does not indicate a new data-sharing policy – WhatsApp has been sharing information on most of its users with Facebook since a major update to its policy in August 2016. The now-removed clause referred to WhatsApp’s offer of allowing users to opt out of sharing data with Facebook at that time, which closed after a 30-day period; users who opted out will continue to be exempt from the Facebook data-sharing arrangement.
Among the data WhatsApp shares with Facebook are users’ locations, IP addresses, phone numbers, device battery level, browser information and several other categories.
The company has started to warn users in a pop-up notification that they “need to accept these updates to continue using WhatsApp” after 8 February. If users would rather not consent, the notification directs users to its online help centre “if you would prefer to delete your account”.
As these alerts have been circulated, privacy advocates have raised concerns about the move. “ “Accept our data grab or get out” is pretty far from what consent should look like under GDPR” Privacy International wrote in a tweet.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk also took to Twitter, urging his 41.9 million followers to use competing message app Signal, which was subsequently downloaded by more than 100,000 people. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey also retweeted Musk’s message.
[ymal]
The contents of user conversations on WhatsApp will continue to be protected by end-to-end encryption after 8 February. EU and UK users also will remain unaffected by the update, as WhatsApp does not share their data with Facebook overseas.
“There are no changes to WhatsApp’s data sharing practices in the European region (including UK) arising from the updated Terms of Service and Privacy Policy," a WhatsApp spokesperson said.
The UK government has issued a new six-week extension to the ban on evictions in England as a result of the third national lockdown, following a similar move by Scotland on Thursday.
This means that baliff evictions will be barred in all but the most egregious cases for the duration of the new lockdown. The current restrictions were set to end on Monday, but charities and housing lawyers called for an immediate extension following Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s announcement of the nationwide lockdown on the same day.
The measure is now slated to end on 21 February at the earliest and will be kept under review. Scotland’s eviction ban will hold until the end of March.
In a statement, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said that court rules and procedures rolled out in September aimed at supporting landlords and tenants will remain in place. Courts will continue to prioritise certain cases, such as those involving anti-social behaviour, domestic abuse and illegal occupation.
Next month, a mediation pilot will begin to support renters and landlords facing court procedures and potential eviction. The pilot will use mediation as part of the possession process to encourage mutual agreements between tenants and landlords.
“Helping to resolve disputes through mediation will enable courts to prioritise urgent cases, supporting landlords and tenants to resolve issues quickly without the need for a formal hearing,” the ministry said. “The mediation pilot will work within the existing court arrangements in England and Wales.”
[ymal]
In addition to these new measures, the ministry will also grant councils £10 million in extra funding to house rough sleepers during the winter months. The accommodation initiative will also focus on GP registration of rough sleepers in an effort to ensure they are not overlooked for COVID-19 vaccines.
Our partner, Simply Law Jobs, has released its Year in Review for 2020.
The review provides a comprehensive overview of the impact of COVID-19 on the industry, specifically how it affected employment within the sector.
The legal industry faced one of its biggest challenges when a global pandemic forced the UK into a national lockdown in March 2020. The unprecedented amount of disruption shook up a seemingly calm legal recruitment marketplace.
The monthly average number of jobs posted to Simply Law Jobs in 2020 was 5,328, a 60% decrease from 2019.
Key findings reveal how 65% of professionals were worried about their future in law.
The report also uncovered the challenges of searching for a job during a global pandemic and how priorities have changed as a result of the events in 2020.
From an interview of 138 legal professionals in December 2020, 64% claimed their priorities had changed. The top three reasons as to why include searching for a better work/home balance, the lowering of salary expectations and the willingness to branch out into other sectors to secure employment.
You can read the full report by downloading it here .
Getting fired from a job is one of the most stressful things that can happen to a person. If you have recently been fired and you believe that you were discriminated against, you may have wondered if you will be able to prove it. According to employment attorneys, your situation may not be as hopeless as you think.
You are probably already aware that if you have been discriminated against, you can complain to the EEOC. If an employer has broken a contract with you, you probably are aware that you can sue. There are a few circumstances that need to be present for you to have a successful wrongful termination lawsuit.
The vast majority of the employment agreements in the United States are at will. This means an employer can fire you at any time without a reason. There are a handful of jobs where you will have an employment contract. Some Employment contracts state that you must be fired “for cause.”
The “cause” you are terminated for must be specified in the contract. There are also some cases where it may be specified in state law. Normally cause will include failure to perform a project correctly or disclosure of company secrets.
Did you blow the whistle on your employer for violating public policies or laws? If you talked to the Internal Revenue Service about your company misreporting funds or called the EEOC about another employee being harassed and your employer responded by demoting you, firing you, or intimidating you in any way, you can sue them for wrongful termination.
The “cause” you are terminated for must be specified in the contract.
If you filed a worker’s compensation claim because you were injured at work, or if you reported your boss to HR for inappropriate behavior, they are not allowed to retaliate against you.
If you have been denied a promotion, terminated, or excluded from work meetings and activities due to your race, sex, age, or orientation, you can file a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission.
If filing a complaint with the EEOC, you will be asked to provide evidence of discrimination. It is a good idea to keep a work diary, you should keep copies of performance reports and sales records as well.
The EEOC will review your case and decide if you can move forward with the lawsuit. If you can, you should hire an employment attorney, who will be able to negotiate with your former employer on your behalf. If you end up having to take your employer to court, an attorney will be able to subpoena the company's records on your behalf.
Being able to subpoena records may be very important in a wrongful termination lawsuit. You will have to establish that you were discriminated against by a judge or jury. Although a diary you kept may be helpful, the company's actual records will be even more beneficial.
For example, If you suspect you were excluded from meetings because of racial discrimination, you will have to prove that this meeting you were not invited to actually took place and that you were not invited to it because of your race. The employer will have a record of the meeting you were excluded from and a list of people who were invited to the meeting. If those records show that everyone who was invited to the meeting was not of your race, you may have a better chance of proving your case.
If you and your coworkers have been attempting to form or join a union and your employer demoted or fired you because of it, you may be able to file a claim against them.
The National Labour Relations Act prohibits employers from firing or otherwise punishing employees for organising strikes or engaging in collective bargaining. The act only protects those employees who are working as a group to change labor conditions.
The legendary feminist writer Alice Walker once said, “The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don't have any.”
Although may have to go through some red tape and deal with a regulatory board or two, you can fight discrimination and injustice in the workplace.
Claire Halle-Smith, Senior Associate in the Commercial Law team at Wright Hassall, explains the new IR35 rules and their implications for businesses.
Anyone reading an article about the new IR35 rules coming into force from 6 April 2021 must be aware about the changes, but this awareness is not universal.
A survey of medium and large construction businesses published in The Construction Index found that 26% of the respondents remained completely unaware of the changes, while only 44% were aware they needed to prepare and had begun doing so.
The fact that only 24% of the businesses actually understand the new guidelines is particularly concerning, given that the changes were originally intended to come into force in April 2020 and were postponed due to the impact of COVID-19.
The introduction of IR35 in April 2000 was prompted by the rise of what HMRC dubbed ‘personal service companies’ (PSC). Whilst there is no legal definition, a PSC is generally considered to be a limited company with a sole director, usually a contractor, who owns most or all of the shares.
The publicity surrounding PSCs focuses on the tax advantages for the contractor themselves and their end-user clients, often ignoring that for many contractors, setting up as a PSC is a necessity as much as a choice. Clients take all the steps they can to ensure that there is no risk of a contract of service existing between themselves and the contractor, which is why many will refuse to work with contractors who aren’t set up as PSCs. This enables them to enter into a contract for services with a limited company rather than an individual, thus avoiding obligations such as Class 1 National Insurance Contributions.
A PSC is generally considered to be a limited company with a sole director, usually a contractor, who owns most or all of the shares.
IR35 was introduced because HMRC believed PSCs were being used mainly as tax avoidance vehicles, enabling businesses to effectively recruit employees but have them operate as contractors. The introduction proved to be highly controversial, with a representative group for contractors and freelancers seeking a judicial review, but losing in the High Court and on appeal.
By 2015 HMRC had become convinced IR35 was proving ineffective and too easily circumvented, which resulted in a change in the law which meant from 6 April 2017, the responsibility fell on public sector clients to decide whether their workers fell under the auspices of IR35 or not. If it was decided contractors were in fact employees, the client would become responsible for operating IR35 and deducting PAYE and National Insurance at source. From 6 April 2021 the same responsibility will fall upon large and medium sized businesses acting in the private sector.
There are exemptions to this rule for companies which meet at least two of these criteria:
Beyond these exemptions all organisations utilising contractors will be responsible for determining precisely what the nature of their employment relationship is.
When HMRC has challenged organisations or contractors over the insistence that the relationship was not one of employer/employee – including cases such as Christa Ackroyd Media Ltd vs HMRC (2017) and Kickabout Productions Ltd vs HMRC the factors involved were generally:
It should be pointed out that the online HMRC test which can be used to check employment status (CEST) doesn’t include any reference to MOO, because HMRC assumes this to be an integral part of any contractor engagement.7
[ymal]
Once an organisation has determined what the employment status of a contractor is, they have to provide a Status Determination Statement (SDS) which sets out the employment status of the contractor, as well as explaining how this decision was reached.
Until this is done and the contractor or any intermediary agency has received an SDS, the presumption on the part of HMRC will be that the organisation is liable for tax and NI contributions.
Although HMRC have stated that they will operate a light touch approach to issuing penalties for non-compliance with the new rules during the first 12 months, they will still actively pursue any tax which remains unpaid through non-compliance with IR35.
Many of the cases brought on this basis by HMRC have failed, but there can be little doubt they will have learned from their mistakes and any organisation seeking to avoid being caught out by IR35 needs to start working now to revise their employment policies in light of expert legal advice.
Amongst the more obvious steps which organisations and contractors can take in order to ensure that they stay outside IR35 are the following:
The simple conclusion is to not be tempted to bypass IR35 by other means and treat any advice to implement a tax avoidance scheme with considerable caution, as most do not deliver the required outcome and do not have HMRC’s blessing.
Planned reforms of the controversial leasehold system in England will see leaseholders given the right to extend their lease by up to 990 years at zero ground rent, housing secretary Robert Jenrick announced on Thursday.
The changes address a scandal that emerged several years ago as it was found that a number of houses and flats had been sold with clauses meaning that ground rents would rise dramatically years on.
Roughly 4.5 million English and Welsh homeowners own their property on a leasehold basis, paying an annual ground rent to the property’s freeholder, which then grants the homeowner the right to continue living there through the lease. While ground rents are often set at a low “peppercorn” rate, clauses in some new developments state that rents would double every 10 years, which left some homes unmortgageable and their owners unable to move while running up large bills.
Currently, leaseholders of houses can only extend their lease once for a fixed 50-year period while paying a ground rent, while flat owners can do so multiple times with a “peppercorn” ground rent of zero for 90 years. Thursday’s measures will ensure that leaseholders who opt to extend the lease on their home will no longer pay any rent to the freeholder.
The new measures come as part of the widest reforms of English property law in 40 years, aimed at making home ownership ”fairer and more secure”.
"Across the country people are struggling to realise the dream of owning their own home but find the reality of being a leaseholder far too bureaucratic, burdensome and expensive," Jenrick said.
[ymal]
“We want to reinforce the security that home ownership brings by changing forever the way we own homes and end some of the worst practices faced by homeowners.”
In addition to the changes made to lease terms and ground rents, the government is also scrapping prohibitive costs like “marriage value” and introducing an online calculator to make it simpler for leaseholders to calculate how much it will cost them to extend their lease or buy their freehold.
