Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
Global law firm Dentons has announced its combination with leading Bolivian law firm Guevara & Gutiérrez, becoming the only global law firm with a presence in the Andean nation.
The merger follows days after Dentons announced another combination with Ecuador’s Paz Horowitz Abogados, accelerating its expansion in Latin America.
Guevara & Gutiérrez is led by Ramiro Guevara and Priimtivo Gutiérrez, who founded the firm in 1989. It has offices in Bolivia’s capital La Paz and in Santa Cruz, the largest city in the country.
The firm, which specialises in banking and finance, dispute resolution, corporate law and energy and natural resources, has a total of 25 lawyers on its staff, nine of whom are partners.
"Guevara & Gutierrez and Dentons share the vision of building the dominant global law firm in Latin America and the Caribbean, one that allows us to follow the clients we currently serve into every corner of the region and world,” Guevara said in a statement. “Dentons’ commitment to excellence and unparalleled service are well matched with our own.”
Dentons’ global CEO, Elliott Portnoy, also hailed the merger. “The combination with Guevara & Gutiérrez will position Dentons as the only global law firm in Bolivia and will continue Dentons’ momentum in Latin America and the Caribbean allowing us to better meet our clients’ needs,” he said.
[ymal]
Dentons is one of the largest law firms in the world, with a staff of more than 10,000 lawyers across 79 countries. It accounted for 85% of all cross-border law firm mergers in 2020, and has become the fastest-growing law firm in Latin America and the Caribbean since entering the region in 2016.
Dentons now has more than 400 practicing lawyers across Latin America.
Planning your estate is the kind of job most would prefer not to think about. Though, like any task, it is not something that is going to fix itself. Without proper estate planning, a person’s legacy can be hijacked by their inability to plan accordingly, or responsibly.
It is understandable that people are busy, and the issue of mortality can sneak up on people. But if you want those you care about to have as little as possible to worry about after your death, then you need to think ahead. Follow this list of considerations to help you plan your estate, and give your loved ones the relief they deserve during such a difficult time.
A lot of people mistakenly feel that they don’t have an estate. They equate the word “estate” with a grand home on a sprawling property when in fact, your estate consists of anything you own that may have value. This includes jewellery, stocks, cars, cash, homes, record collections, family heirlooms, and anything else that holds some kind of value.
Think about all your possessions that have value and compile them in a list. Try to arrange them from most to least valuable and consider where they would be most useful. A good spreadsheet is perfect for this.
Most people are not experts on estate planning, so it’s a good idea to enlist the help of an experienced estate planning attorney. They can use their expertise to assist you with the safeguarding of your estate and possessions.
When you die, your gross estate is calculated. This is the total sum of all your estate assets. After this, your taxable estate is considered. This includes mortgages, loans, administration fees and anything else that may cost money.
Most people are not experts on estate planning, so it’s a good idea to enlist the help of an experienced estate planning attorney.
For the average person, the financial logistics of a death are a nightmare. Hiring a specialist attorney can save you time and money by keeping your family out of court, and advising the best tax options for your situation.
Many people, even those in the advanced stages of life, lack a coherent will. Perhaps they have a dated one which needs updating, or maybe they don’t have one at all. There are two aspects to a will: the legally binding side that distributes your assets, and the morally binding Statement of Wishes that outlines your intentions for your family.
A will is essential to ensure that your possessions and assets go where and to whom you want them. If you do not have a will, your estate will defer to what’s called intestate succession and the distribution of your assets will be decided either by the government or through a long-winded legal process. It is recommended that you update your will every five years.
A Statement of Wishes is an informal document that supports your will. It is not legally binding and is easily amended; however, it does provide context to the decisions that you have made in the legal part of the will.
Something that should never be overlooked is the wellbeing of children. In cases of bereavement, the emotional stability, financial security, and innocence of a child can all be affected. In this situation, there are two major areas to consider.
First, you’ll need to decide which assets will go to your children. If you have a college fund, savings account, or anything else set up for your children, then this should be considered when distributing your assets. This might mean that speculative investments, such as property and stocks, are a good option to leave to your kids.
[ymal]
You will also need to think about the intimate detail of guardianship of your children if they are under the age of 18. Consider entrusting this to someone who will be able to house them, fund their lives, and raise them decently. If you fail to make this decision before your passing, it will be left in the hands of the courts.
A death in the family can be difficult for reasons far beyond emotional trauma. Without a formal will in place, family members will be left to assume positions you haven't specifically assigned them. This could lead to the worst financial manager of the family gaining control over the estate, cause disagreements over the distributions of assets, or perhaps no one wants responsibility of your pet.
An estate plan assigns duties to those who will be responsible for your wealth if you become incapacitated or pass away. It allows you to provide individualized plans for each family member. This insures against unfair distribution and makes financial preparations for family members who are either too young or not responsible enough to do so themselves. (3)
The idea of estate planning can make some people uncomfortable, but it is an imperative part of life. Planning your assets, speaking with professionals, making arrangements for your children, and allocating assets and responsibilities is one of the best things you can do for your family’s well-being during such a difficult time.
Before 1 January 2019, the Family Law Act had never received an overhaul since its inception in 1976. Considering things have changed a whole lot since the late 70s it was only a matter of time until some significant changes were made to the practice of family law. Today, we’ll have a look at how family law has changed since reforms were made in 2019 so that you have a better understanding of how it is practiced in today’s modern climate. Read on to find out more!
Anyone who has interacted with the Family Court of Australia in the past will know that an increasing number of complex cases in recent years has resulted in significant waiting times that have reached up to 18 months in some cases. Due to this high demand and the lack of staffing to keep up with the public’s needs, it was decided that the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCFCA) would be established in January of 2019.
This change saw the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court being consolidated into one court that would prioritise urgent and high-risk cases as efficiently as possible. High-risk cases are now appointed to a judge and division with the most expertise, allowing for parties involved to know what to expect in terms of legal fees and the duration of time that is likely to be taken for their matter to be finalised.
As the family law system has never before been reviewed prior to 2019, it has come under a lot of criticism for being impractical and out of date in today’s climate. Long waiting times such as 18 months for a case to reach trial have meant that families and children are left with significant amounts of uncertainty for months on end. These changes have also been made to address the delays, inconsistencies and confusion that were plaguing the family court and has resulted in a significant reduction of costs for all parties involved.
[ymal]
With both the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia now consolidated as one, the system has seen huge savings in resources by eliminating the crossover between two jurisdictions. It is estimated that this new system will be able to serve up to 8,000 cases annually, with critical cases involving domestic or family violence being fast-tracked for the safety of all involved.
Of course, every change comes with its own band of critics, and the consolidation of the above two courts has received its fair share of opprobrium. Many have expressed their dismay at the passage of this legislation, claiming that victims of family violence run the risk of falling through the cracks in the new system. Critics say that the court merger could see judges with "no real knowledge" of family law presiding over cases, which could lead to even longer wait times for families that are trying to settle their disputes.
Due to forced lockdowns and isolation during COVID-19, more couples than ever have been put under strain by the unique pressures of the pandemic. Many worry that this influx of cases will flood the newly consolidated court and may prove to provide an environment where perpetrators are able to slide through nooks and crannies in the system.
The changes to family law have certainly been met with mixed emotions, and with good reason too. What do you think about the merger?
In 2014, the United States recorded over 32,600 deaths caused by road accidents; 962 of these fatalities occurred in Tennessee.
According to auto accident lawyers, most vehicle accidents are avoidable when certain safety precautions are in place. Below are ten things every driver should know that can help prevent auto accidents and potentially save lives.
You should avoid distractions when driving, whether you are headed from Kentucky to Tennessee or Memphis to Nashville. You should avoid using your mobile phone; do not text when driving. Also, do not fiddle with the GPS or Sat Nav; pull over to sort out what you need then continue with your journey. You also should pull over to deal with the kids if you have them in the back and they are screaming or fighting. In short, avoid things that will take away your attention from the road as you drive. It only takes a second for a road accident to happen.
Never speed off in your vehicle before adjusting your mirrors to make sure you see all the areas surrounding the car. Moreover, avoid relying solely on the mirrors; have a habit of turning around to check your blind spots and ensure there is no oncoming traffic. Semi-trucks have significant blind spots; therefore, never assume they see you.
Understanding your vehicle’s performance is crucial. You should know how well it can stop when you push on the brakes, how it handles around bends, and if the tires will work even under poor weather conditions, among other issues. Being familiar with your car’s performance will play a vital part in helping you avoid situations that could result in an accident.
Understanding your vehicle’s performance is crucial.
Having a maintenance schedule is an essential part of familiarising yourself with your vehicle. You should keep track of the dates you take your car for maintenance checks. It will help you know when you last had the fluids changed, got new brakes, or fitted new tires. The car’s performance is better when it is in tip-top shape. It will be safer to operate, thus lowering the risk of accidents.
Some drivers take bold yet very risky decisions during the day and can be more erratic at night. Many drunk driving cases happen at night. Moreover, it is hard to see things clearly at night. Your vision is not as good as during the day. That is why you must be hyper-alert when driving at night.
Pay attention to the driver or vehicle in front of you, but also scan the surroundings in which you are driving. Drivers can change lanes at a moment’s notice. Therefore, be attentive when driving, especially when approaching an intersection. Always look both ways to ensure the coast is clear before crossing. You might feel confident about your driving skills, but you do not know the competency skills of the driver next to you.
If you are tired and drowsy, you should consider postponing your drive. Driving when tired increases the risk of causing an accident. At times, the drowsiness can be attributed to the lack of enough sleep. As such, you will be less alert and feel fatigued when behind the wheel.
[ymal]
Not using turn signals when changing lanes, cutting in front of another driver, or changing lanes abruptly are some of the careless or negligent behaviours that lead to accidents and are against the law. It is a behaviour that can cause some drivers to develop road rage and act recklessly. If you are courteous to other road users and follow the rules when changing lanes, you will lower the chances of causing car accidents.
The fast lane has its conveniences, but it is a bad idea when you plan to get off the interstate quickly. You also do not want to be in this lane when there is another vehicle out of control. Stick to the centre or right lanes. They make it easier to take your exit. Leave the left lane to drivers that love high speeds, which are likely to cause accidents.
Anger can impede your judgment, make you less attentive on the road, or act irrationally when dealing with another driver. Avoid jumping into your vehicle if you are angry.
Jennifer Rhind, Solicitor in the Commercial Litigation Team at Wright Hassall Solicitors, explores how far customer reviews are legally protected and the recourse firms have against claims that they feel are insubstantial.
When a business or individual interacts with the firm at any point on their journey to becoming a client, most will want to discover more about the firm, its people and its reputation. Typically this will involve an online search, which will throw up Google or Trustpilot reviews.
How a firm responds to matters, the accuracy of advice, the quality of service and the approach of the lawyers, are all likely to be summed up on review sites and unfortunately, the unhappy client is more likely to wax lyrical than the contented one. Prospective clients of any business, in any sector, will consider these reviews a valuable source of information, helping shape their perception about a law firm and its suitability to handle the challenge for which they are seeking advice.
Poor reviews are often not what they seem, with the all-important context missing. Bad ones can cross the line from the reasonable opinion of the author into potential defamatory statements, which can have serious consequences for the target of the review, tweet, post or comment.
But just because a client feels they can express their opinion with impunity and say anything they want about the service received, it does not mean a business has to accept the reputational damage if it believes there is no substance to the claims.
No-one is immune from a defamation claim and there have been some high-profile defamation claims over recent years, which have added to the general rise in claims.
The story of law firm Summerfield Browne seeking damages against a previous client who left a defamatory review on Trustpilot saying the solicitors were: “A total waste of money, another scam solicitor”, is well known, but offers hope for other businesses.
Poor reviews are often not what they seem, with the all-important context missing.
Although this previous client argued this was his honest opinion, the Court awarded Summerfield Browne damages of £25,000 and costs, plus an injunction banning the previous client from repeating his allegations, whilst ordering Trustpilot to remove the review.
Trustpilot denounced the actions of the law firm, claiming the Court’s decision aimed to curtail the consumer’s right to freedom of expression and the firm has since received a host of bad reviews, which are likely not even from customers - just people standing up for the little man, as they see it.
This is a growing problem for businesses in all sectors, with a recent Trustpilot report detailing its removal of more than 2 million fake or harmful reviews out of a total of 39 million reviews left during 2020 alone. The vast majority were dealt with by automated software.
If someone, even anonymously, expresses an opinion about your business that you believe is defamatory, you should consider obtaining legal advice from a specialist, particularly in light of the potential defences which may be available to an individual faced with a defamation claim.
For example, if the individual can show there is substantial truth to the alleged defamatory statement, a claim in defamation is unlikely to succeed. Just because a statement is bad for business, it does not automatically mean you can do anything about it.
If someone, even anonymously, expresses an opinion about your business that you believe is defamatory, you should consider obtaining legal advice from a specialist.
The law in relation to defamation is contained within the Defamation Act 2013. For a statement to be defamatory, the publication of the statement must have caused, or be likely to cause, serious harm to reputation. If it is a business that suspects its reputation has been defamed, it will need to show that it has caused or is likely to cause the business to suffer serious financial loss in order to be regarded as ‘serious harm’.
A partner having to deal with bad online reviews or damaging comments on social media about the firm or its people can find it both stressful and time consuming, but just because the comments are unpleasant or personal in nature, it does not automatically mean they are defamatory.
The public’s growing desire to share their experiences and the increasing importance consumers place on reviews, tweets, posts, comments etc., as they undertake research during the buying process ensures there is a growing risk of online defamation - which should not go unchallenged.
The pandemic appears to have been good for many law firms, but success can bring envious criticism and claims of law firms benefitting from the wider misery endured by the public in lockdown. This can embolden keyboard warriors to vent, believing they can express any opinions they want about a business and in fact, one of the defences to a claim in defamation is honest opinion.
However, anyone trying to use this defence would need to establish that the words complained of as being defamatory were in fact a statement of opinion, which indicated as such and which an honest person could have held, based on facts that existed at the time the statement was published.
[ymal]
If the statement is deemed to be a statement of fact, this defence would be unsuccessful - there is a very fine line between statement of fact and statement of opinion.
Those within the business responsible for reviewing online comments should always carefully consider the meaning of the words used. Not just in their natural and ordinary meaning, however, as words can be defamatory through innuendo or implication.
Whilst the author of an opinion might not consider their words to be defamatory, there are various factors to consider, such as whether the author has over-elaborated the position and what the ordinary reasonable reader would consider a statement to mean.
Further, as a general rule an individual will not escape liability just by claiming they are simply repeating something someone else told them, unless they can prove the subject matter of the comment is true.
A business operating in the modern digitally connected world must actively monitor its online reputation. It should welcome honest customer feedback, but be ready to act to protect and defend a hard won reputation if it believes it has been unfairly maligned.
In a historic victory for unions, Uber’s British drivers will receive the rights of full workers following a landmark Supreme Court ruling in February.
Uber said it was “turning the page” on workers’ rights, guaranteeing that its more than 70,000 UK drivers would receive a minimum wage, holiday pay and pensions as befits their “worker” designation.
“This follows the recent UK Supreme Court ruling, which provides a clearer path forward as to a model that gives drivers the rights of worker status while continuing to let them work flexibly,” Uber said in a statement on Tuesday.
The company also said its drivers would earn at least the National Living Wage, or £8.72 per hour, after they receive a trip request. Should this be adopted more widely, it could represent a major change for the gig economy.
In February, the UK Supreme Court dismissed Uber’s appeal against a 2016 employment tribunal ruling that its drivers should be classed as workers and not self-employed “partners”.
After its appeal was thrown out, Uber said it would consult with drivers while the implications of the ruling were worked out.
Other countries have taken different stances on the eligibility of Uber drivers to be considered full workers. France’s top court in 2020 recognised drivers’ right to be considered an employee, and European Union regulators are also considering the implementation of new rules to protect gig economy workers.
[ymal]
Regulatory changes in California last year would have forced companies with a reliance on the gig economy to treat their contractors as full employees, leading Uber, DoorDash and Lyft to fund the $205 million Proposition 22 ballot measure. The measure was approved by voters, granting the companies exemption from the new labour law.
There are two categories that convicts fall into: misdemeanour and felony charges. While misdemeanour charges include minor violations and can land you in prison for a maximum of one year, felons can get longer sentences for violent crimes. While the government is pushing law enforcement to exercise its full power to deter crimes, more convicted felons are becoming repeat offenders. About 69% return to prison within three years after their release.
The following could be possible solutions for convicts to avoid going back to prison and find their way into society as reformed citizens.
Preparing for life after prison requires the offender to work their way to change willingly. Institutions work with agencies in the community to provide opportunities and assistance for convicts' rehabilitation for reintegration into society.
Institutional programmes are also one of the differences between a felony and a misdemeanour offender. Such programmes are only available to those who’ve been in prison for many years. Regarding other differences between these two general types of crimes, it's best to talk with legal professionals.
Institutional programmes for felony offenders can include the following:
Preparing for life after prison requires the offender to work their way to change willingly.
The bootcamp programme is a military-training-style camp that aims to instil self-discipline and steer offenders away from substance abuse. The programme takes in offenders under 35, non-violent, and eligible for parole in three years. The bootcamp has various physical exercises to help offenders develop physical and mental acuity. They keep a tight schedule of drills, tasks, and classes.
Accommodations are similar to that of a barracks. Those trained in bootcamp are early to new offenders, violators on probation, and delinquents. It has been reported that counseling and the camp atmosphere encouraged a positive change. After parole, they’re integrated into society and are pressed to find employment. The supreme court prevented disclosure of criminal records as a way to help those former convicts.
Felonies are a series of significant crime offences that could land anyone in jail. These crimes can inflict bodily harm on the victims and have you spending time in prison without parole. Not all felons can go to jail for varying charges. The court may grant probation instead to the offender through the following conditions:
[ymal]
For offenders under the age of 17, detention centres provide temporary care for youths who’ve committed a crime and been arrested. The youth detention center serves as a holding ground after the court finds that the child is likely to go back to dangerous crimes amid processing. Minors need to stay at detention centres for up to 27 days. In 2018, over 195,000 kids were placed in detention centers—all 625 of them scattered all over the nation.
Detention centres are different from correctional facilities as most children and teenagers are placed there for minor offences. These centres help keep minors away from the public. At the same time, government efforts can shift their focus away from punishments to rehabilitation instead.
The mentioned ways can help offenders reevaluate their lives and encourage them to live a quiet life after serving a long term in prison. They’re undergoing evaluation before being taken into the following programs to help those who want to change. Even so, it’s still up to the offender if they’ll take the necessary steps to get back to society as paroles require offenders to join such programs to prepare them for release.
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer has become the latest magic circle firm to allow lawyers and staff to work remotely for up to half of their time on the clock.
Announced on Monday, the firm’s new agile working policy will allow Freshfields lawyers – including trainees – and business professionals to spend up to 50% of their hours working from home on the condition that their arrangements take account of client and business commitments.
Freshfields said the policy is an “interim approach” and that staff preferences may change once offices reopen.
Claire Wills, Freshfields’ London office managing partner, said: “Our guidance follows feedback from colleagues who signalled a clear preference for more flexibility but also recognises the importance of in-person interaction to our culture, personal development and client engagement.”
Olivia Balson, director of Freshfields’ Global Centre in Manchester, stressed the Centre’s importance to the connection and development of staff at the firm. “At the same time, we strongly believe in the value of a balance between remote and office-based working,” she said.
Freshfields is the latest in a swathe of law firms granting staff the ability to work from home as they feel appropriate. Taylor Wessing moved to adopt a “hybrid” work model in November, while Dentons, Slater & Gordon and other firms closed several offices in a shift towards remote working.
[ymal]
Staff at Linklaters and Norton Rose Fulbright have also been allowed to conduct 50% of their work from home under new rules. Other firms, like Cushman & Wakefield, have not been so quick to shift away from the office environment.
“One of the huge problems in the real estate industry is that people will over-simplify how they use their real estate going forward,” said C&W partner James Campbell at a Professional Practices Alliance webinar. “The reality is in 12 or 24 months’ time, when we get to the new normal, they will say ‘actually we probably needed more space.”
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has launched criminal proceedings against NatWest bank over its alleged breaching of money laundering regulations.
In a statement on Tuesday, the FCA said the case was sparked by the detection of “increasingly large cash deposits” being made into a UK account, which it alleged that NatWest’s systems failed to adequately scrutinise. Around £368 million was paid into the account, including £264 million in cash.
This case marks the first prosecution to be brought under the UK’s Money Laundering Regulations 2007 and the first against a bank. Charges are being brought under regulation 45 of the regulations, which requires firms to maintain adequate anti-money laundering controls and to take “all reasonable steps to prevent their use for money laundering purposes”.
The allegations date back to between 2011 and 2016, with the FCA having begun its investigation in 2017. The bank has been aware of their probe since then.
“NatWest Group has been co-operating with the FCA's investigation to date,” a spokesperson for the bank said in a statement. “NatWest Group takes extremely seriously its responsibility to seek to prevent money laundering by third parties and accordingly has made significant, multi-year investments in its financial crime systems and controls."
NatWest is a subsidiary of the NatWest Group and is 62% taxpayer-owned following its government bailout in the 2008 financial crisis. Its shares were down 1% in early trading following the news of the FCA’s legal action.
[ymal]
The FCA also said that it was conducting separate investigations into other firms under the Money Laundering Regulations 2007. No organisations have yet been named as the subjects of these probes.
NatWest is scheduled to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 14 April. No individuals are being charged as part of the proceedings.
A US federal judge has temporarily blocked the government from imposing restrictions on US investment in Chinese electronics manufacturer Xiaomi.
Under the Trump administration in January, the Department of Defence added Xiaomi to a list of Chinese firms that it alleged to have ties to the Chinese military. Investors with stakes in the listed companies were required to sell their interests by a deadline that was set to go into effect next week.
Xiaomi filed a complaint in a Washington court seeking its removal from the list, arguing that it was not controlled by the People’s Liberation Army. On Friday, US District Judge Rudolph Contreras said that the court had found the Department of Defence had “not made the case that the national security interests at stake here are compelling.”
Contreras added: “Xiaomi is a publicly-traded company that produces commercial products for civilian use, is controlled by its independent board and controlling shareholders, and is not effectively controlled or associated with others under the ownership or control of the PRC or its security services.”
Xiaomi had previously argued that the ban on investment was “arbitrary and capricious” and that it deprived the firm of its right to due process. It said it was pleased with the ruling, but will continue to push for the court to permanently remove the designation.
[ymal]
“Xiaomi reiterates that it is a widely held, publicly traded, independently managed corporation that offers consumer electronics products solely for civilian and commercial use,” the company said in a statement released on Saturday.
Shares in Xiaomi rose sharply on Monday following the ruling, surging more than 10% in early trade.
