Tees Law

Update: Addenbrookes paediatric surgeon suspended after children left with injuries

Posted on 26 March 202513 May 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

At Tees, we are shocked and saddened by the news that a specialist paediatric surgeon at Addenbrooke’s Hospital in Cambridge has been suspended following a review.

BBC News has reported that an investigation uncovered nine medical negligence cases where children had been left with injuries affecting their quality of life following complex hip surgery procedures. These injuries have had a lasting impact, requiring further medical treatment and affecting mobility.

It has now been revealed that the review will assess treatment given to 700 patients who had planned operations and another 100 who had emergency treatment. Although the surgeon specialised in children’s surgeries, they also carried out emergency orthopaedic procedures on adults.

Cambridge University Hospitals Chief Executive, Roland Sinker, has confirmed that an external review will take place into the medical treatment carried out by the surgeon at the hospital. He also stated that reports have been made to the General Medical Council, NHS England, and the Care Quality Commission.

Andrew Kennedy KC has been appointed by the trust to chair a panel of expert clinicians to undertake the external review.

The trust has confirmed that concerns about this surgeon were raised 10 years ago in 2015, and that their clinical practice was restricted last year as a precautionary measure.

While the full details of the investigation have not been made publicly available, the suspension raises serious concerns for those patients who may have been treated by this surgeon, potentially affecting their health and well-being.

For many patients, undergoing surgery or treatment from a medical professional is a deeply personal experience. When that trust is broken, the consequences can be both physically and emotionally devastating.

This news is both shocking and heartbreaking for the children and families who are affected. It is crucial that patients and families receive the support they need to obtain answers and where necessary access any follow up treatment and rehabilitation.

About Tees
We at Tees are ideally placed to assist families who may have been affected and have already been approached by some who may have been affected.

With years of experience in medical negligence claims, we are well-equipped to navigate the complexities of these cases, ensuring that patients and their families receive the support and justice they deserve. We understand the profound impact that medical negligence can have, both physically and emotionally and our team is here to provide expert guidance.

Alarmingly, this news comes in the wake of the recent exposure of the practices of Mr. Jabbar, an orthopaedic medical professional at Great Ormond Street Hospital. We are already supporting families affected by the shocking failures in medical care linked to Mr. Jabbar.

Employment law update: Statutory limits and wage increases from April 2025

Posted on 25 March 202526 May 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

The Government has published The Employment Rights (Increase of Limits) Order 2025, confirming key updates to statutory compensation limits and employment-related payments. These changes, many of which come into effect from 6 April 2025, will impact employers and employees across the UK. Here’s what you need to know:

Statutory cap on a week’s pay

From 6 April 2025, the statutory cap on a week’s pay—used to calculate redundancy pay and the basic award in unfair dismissal cases—will rise from £700.00 to £719.00.

This change increases the maximum basic award for unfair dismissal claims to £21,570.00 (calculated as 20 × £719 × 1.5).
The maximum compensatory award for unfair dismissal will also increase, moving from £115,115.00 to £118,223.00.

Statutory redundancy pay

From 6 April 2025, the maximum amount of statutory redundancy pay an employee can receive also increases due to the updated weekly cap:

Redundancy pay is calculated based on age and length of service:

Half a week’s pay for each full year of service under age 22.
One week’s pay for each full year of service between ages 22 and 40.
One and a half weeks’ pay for each full year of service aged 41 and over.

The maximum number of years that can be taken into account remains 20.

This means the maximum statutory redundancy payment will also be £21,570.00.

April 2025: Other key rate changes

National minimum wage and national living wage

Effective from 1 April 2025, the following new hourly rates apply:

Age 21 and over (National living wage): £12.21 (up from £11.44)
Ages 18–20: £10.00 (up from £8.60)
Ages 16–17: £7.55 (up from £6.40)
Apprentices: £7.55 (up from £6.40)
Accommodation Offset: £10.66 per day (up from £9.99

Statutory sick pay (SSP)

From 6 April 2025:

SSP increases from £116.75 to £118.75 per week
The minimum earnings threshold to qualify rises to £125.00 per week (up from £123.00)

Family friendly payments

Also taking effect 6 April 2025, the weekly maximum rate for the following statutory payments increases from £184.03 to £187.18, or 90% of average weekly earnings if lower:

Statutory Maternity Pay (after the first 6 weeks)
Statutory Paternity Pay
Statutory Shared Parental Pay
Statutory Adoption Pay (after the first 6 weeks)
Statutory Parental Bereavement Pay

The earnings threshold for these payments also rises to £125.00 per week.

Maternity Allowance will similarly rise to a maximum of £187.18 per week, provided eligibility criteria are met.

Pending: 2025 Vento band updates

At the time of writing, the updated Vento bands (used in discrimination claims for injury to feelings awards) have not yet been announced. These are expected by the end of March 2025 and will also take effect from 6 April 2025.

A note on inflation

The £19.00 increase to the weekly pay cap in 2025 is notably smaller than in previous years (compared to £72 in 2023 and £57 in 2024), reflecting the recent decline in inflation. Employers should still review and update internal policies and redundancy packages in line with the new limits.

Our team can help

These updates impact both employers and employees, particularly in cases involving redundancy, dismissal, or family-related leave. Our employment law specialists at Tees Law are here to guide you through these changes and ensure your workplace policies, contracts, and practices are compliant and up to date.

Whether you’re navigating a redundancy process, reviewing contracts, or managing a tribunal claim, our expert team is here to support you every step of the way.

Get in touch with our Employment Law team for tailored legal advice.

Pet-nuptial agreements – plan ahead to save heartache

Posted on 18 March 202518 May 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

Only one in 14 couples with pets in the UK currently have a pet-nuptial agreement in place and one charity, the Blue Cross, takes in around 4 pets every week because of divorce or separation. Planning ahead about how to take care of pets, in the event of a split, can help save some heartache.

Pets play a central role in families and many people have a significant emotional attachment to them. It is no surprise that 51% of UK adults own a pet of any type, with there being an estimated 10.6 million pet dogs and 10.8 million pet cats across the UK. Pets are becoming increasingly relevant in discussions with lawyers and mediators in divorce and separation negotiations, alongside considerations about children and finances. Animals and our relationship with them are by their very nature, emotional, and without an agreement in place, conflict over pets can add a distressing element to what may be an already volatile situation. A pet-nuptial agreement can help avoid a dispute at what might be an emotional time.

Pets as assets

It can often come as a shock to separating couples to find out that in the UK, the law regarding pets during a break-up or divorce, is the same as the law for personal property, such as a television or a car. In contrast to when the court decide arrangements for children, the family courts have no requirement to consider the welfare of the pet.

A court, if asked to decide on who should get the pet, would typically focus on:

who paid for the pet in the first place
who has funded its care (food, vet bills etc)
which of the parties are financially stable enough on their own to support a pet
if there are outstanding and particularly expensive veterinary costs, these can be included in the financial settlement
which partner has the most suitable home for the pet.

However, in December 2024, there was a welcome shift in judicial decision making with regards to pet ownership on separation with the case of FI v DO [2024] EWFC 384 (B) which involved dispute as to who would retain the family’s pet dog, a Golden Retriever, amongst other assets. The Judge in this matter went beyond financial considerations which had historically framed decisions surrounding pet ownership to date and included factors such as the living arrangements for the dog post-separation, who the dog would consider its primary caregiver and the best environment for the dog’s well-being.

Whilst this decision does not go as far as to rebut the position that a pet is a chattel, it does provide scope for the court to consider the pet’s needs and how any change in its ownership may affect not only the people around it, but the pet itself.

What is a pet-nuptial agreement?

While a traditional pre-nuptial agreement may solely focus on division of real assets and property, a pet-nuptial agreement (or a pet-nuptial clause in your pre-nuptial agreement) will focus specifically on the care and living arrangements for your pet.

A pet-nuptial agreement is a pre-arranged plan that puts your pet’s needs at the heart of the matter. It allows you to both agree beforehand where your pet will live, if you and your partner break up.

It’s important when creating your pet-nuptial agreement that your pet’s wellbeing is the main focus of the agreement. Of course, you and your partner can resolve any disputes regarding your pet without talking to lawyers, if you can both come to an arrangement that you can agree on. However, a pet-nuptial agreement takes away the uncertainty of a potential future conflict. As well as being very important for your own peace of mind with regard to your pet’s future, it’s also important for your pet. Pets that are handed into charities, such as the Blue Cross, often suffer from emotional trauma.

The advantages of a pet nuptial agreement include:

Clarity and prevention of dispute: having pre-agreed arrangements for your pet can help avoid future conflict by clearly outlining how your pet will be treated
Emotional protection: our pets are often seen as family members and having an agreement in place can reduce the emotional burden (on both the separating couple and the pet) of making these decisions in the heat of the moment
Financial planning: similarly to a pre-nuptial agreement, a pet-nuptial agreement can provide peace of mind in terms of what costs, such as veterinary bills, insurance and other expenses, are to be met when separating

Is a pet-nuptial agreement legally binding?

Whilst not currently legally binding in the UK, following a landmark decision in the Supreme Court, courts are likely to uphold a pre-nuptial agreement that meets certain criteria. Speak to one of our specialist legal advisers for more information on this.

What will you be agreeing to?

By taking custody of your pet within the pet-nuptial agreement, you are agreeing to follow the laws and welfare needs set out in the 2006 Animal Welfare Act these include:

the need for a suitable living environment
the need for a suitable diet
the need to be able to exhibit normal behaviour patterns
the need to be housed with, or apart, from other animals as needed
the need to be protected from pain, suffering, injury and, disease.

Being a pet owner is a big responsibility, and it is important that, within a pet-nuptial agreement, consideration is given to who will be best placed to meet the needs of the pet considering the above.

Pets with financial value

Some pets do have a financial value as well as an emotional value. There are many breeds of pedigree animals which cost a lot of money to buy. Also, some pedigree animals are involved in breeding which means they have a financial value in terms of their future litters. You may even have a pet that generates money from advertisements or social media – or is even starring in the movies! While it’s unlikely your cat is a YouTube star with its own following, if there is any financial value associated with your pet, it’s even more vital that you consider putting a pet-nuptial agreement in place.

Whilst the Pet Abduction Act 2024 that recently came into force has recognised dogs and cats as sentient beings capable of experiencing distress and other emotional trauma, it is important to note that this legislation does not make it an offence if the pet has lived in the same household as a couple before they separated. Therefore, it would not be possible for your ex-partner to “steal” your pet (if they had lived with them) and for you to seek recourse under this legislation, making a pet-nuptial agreement even more important.

How does divorce affect your pet?

Separation can be an emotional and confusing time for your pets, as well as for the owners, for many reasons. The uncertainty that follows a divorce or separation can upset your pet’s routine. You may move the pet’s home and if so, it’s important you give your pet time to adjust to its new surroundings.

Should a pet be shared?

Animal charities such as the Blue Cross or The Kennel Club advise that sharing a pet is not a good idea, as it can be upsetting and negatively affect their well-being. The same goes for when splitting up animals who were together before separation, as this means they lose their companion. It’s suggested that the best route is for one primary caregiver to look after all the pets who are close to each other.

Consideration should be given to whether the separating partner who will not retain ownership of the pet should be allowed to spend time with them on certain occasions. This might be considered easier for certain types of pets, such as dogs, more so than others.

Separating couples who are experiencing difficulty communicating may want to consider the use of a “parenting app” to discuss arrangements for how their pet spends time. There are several free and fee-paying apps available and, whilst typically used to facilitate discussions regarding arrangements for children, can rightly be used for pets. Such apps allow shared calendars to track who is responsible for the pet at any time, as well as the ability to share updates when the pet is not in the other partners care.

How to make a pet-nuptial agreement

If you and your partner are looking to create a pet-nuptial agreement, contact us and we will create a bespoke agreement for you both. In preparation for making your pet-nup agreement, you and your partner should:

have already discussed the topic of pet ownership upon potential separation
have an idea of who is going to be the primary carer
know how the costs of looking after the pet will be shared
have thought about the amount of time the partner who is not keeping the pet, gets to spend with the pet, should they want to.

Once agreed, we will create your bespoke arrangement and send both parties a copy for you to keep safe – and hopefully never need to use. Pets are more than just personal property and having an agreement in place helps ensure they are treated that way on separation.

Employment settlement agreements: Key considerations

Posted on 18 March 202526 May 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

Employment settlement agreements are legally binding contracts between an employer and an employee that include the terms of an agreed departure or resolution of a dispute. These agreements, previously known as compromise agreements, allow employees to waive certain employment rights in exchange for compensation or other benefits. Understanding your rights and obligations before signing one is crucial.

Key features of settlement agreement

Voluntary Participation: Both the employer and employee must enter into the agreement willingly and the employee should not be coerced or placed under undue pressure
Independent Legal Advice: Employees must seek independent legal advice to ensure they understand the terms
Written Agreement: To be legally enforceable, the agreement must be in writing
Settlement of Specific Claims: The document must clearly state which claims are being settled to prevent future disputes

How long do you have to consider a settlement offer?

A common concern for employers and employees is how long to offer for time to consider an offer before making a decision. The guidance from ACAS (the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service) suggests a 10-day period to review a written settlement agreement.

However, recent case law has provided clarification on verbal offers and deadlines.

In Gallagher v McKinnon’s Auto and Tyres Ltd [2024] EAT 174, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that an employer giving an employee a 48-hour deadline to accept a verbal settlement offer did not amount to undue pressure or improper behaviour. The Tribunal clarified that the ACAS-recommended 10-day timeline applies to written offers, not verbal ones. While employees should be given reasonable time to consider offers, a shorter deadline for verbal agreements is not automatically considered coercive or unfair.

Why employers and employees use settlement agreements

Employers may offer a settlement agreement to:

Avoid lengthy and costly tribunal claims
Protect business interests by including confidentiality clauses
Ensure a clean break with no further claims

Employees may benefit from a settlement agreement by:

Receiving financial compensation beyond statutory redundancy pay
Avoiding the uncertainty of a tribunal claim
Negotiating better exit terms (e.g., a reference letter or extended notice period)

Seek expert legal advice before signing

While settlement agreements can be beneficial to both parties, they must be compliant with, amongst other things, section 203 of the Employment Rights Act to validly settle statutory claims (such as unfair dismissal and unlawful discrimination) it’s essential for employers to prepare these in a way that complies with applicable legal obligations and for employees to be able to fully understand what rights are being waived. Seeking independent legal advice ensures that the agreement is fair and that you are not accepting an offer under undue pressure.

If you are dealing with exit terms and a settlement agreement, Tees Law is here to help. Our experienced employment law specialists can prepare, review and advise on such agreements and the best course of action.

Tees resolves high-conflict divorce with strategic non-court solution

Posted on 17 June 2025 by Sophie Soraf

When Richard* faced a complex and acrimonious divorce with his ex-wife Lola*, our family law team at Tees helped to steer the case away from escalating courtroom battles. With a significant income at stake and court delays looming, we proposed a private hearing—leading to a fair resolution ahead of schedule and securing a financial outcome that protected our client’s future.

For context:

Tees were instructed to represent Richard* in financial remedy proceedings relating to an acrimonious divorce from his wife, Lola*.

Richard and Lola had been living in Dubai with their two young children at the time of separation, where Richard had relocated from London for work. However, on separation Lola decided to move back to the UK with the children whilst Richard remained in Dubai where his income increased dramatically to over £600,000 per annum.

Richard applied to the court for divorce and financial remedy after which ensued extremely embittered court proceedings.

What happened next:

The principal area of dispute was the extent to which Richard would need to provide ongoing financial support (i.e. maintenance) through his income to Lola and the children.

When considering the appropriate level of such maintenance, the court consider the recipient party’s reasonable earning capacity and reasonable monthly needs. Inevitably, Lola’s position was that her income capacity was lower, and her monthly “needs” were significantly higher than those considered reasonable on behalf of Richard.

Although the parties made offers of settlement, they remained significantly far apart in their positions with each party resolute in their views on what the appropriate financial settlement should be.

With a stalemate in negotiations and the case not due to be heard in court again for some time due to court backlogs, Tees proposed the parties engage in ‘non-court dispute resolution’.

Tees suggested the parties attend a ‘private’ court hearing where the parties instruct an experienced family law barrister to take on the role of judge and provide the parties with an indication which would act as a foundation for settlement negotiations to recommence.

Giving you the full picture:

After some resistance from the wife, Tees persuaded her that ‘non-court dispute resolution’ would be the most efficient way of achieving progress towards a conclusion which would be in the interests of everyone involved.

The parties attended the ‘private’ hearing and Richard received an indication which was largely aligned with his position. The clear opinion on the case from the ‘private’ judge encouraged the wife to compromise on her position following the hearing and an agreement to settle the matter was agreed shortly thereafter.

Tees’ expertise and creative approach to resolving the dispute meant that Richard achieved a result which helped to protect his income and without the delays of the costly traditional court process.

If you’re unsure of what to do next after a separation, our experts are here to guide you through the process.

*Names have been changed in order to protect the privacy of our client.

Limb lengthening and reconstruction orthopaedic surgeries: When medical negligence may arise

Posted on 16 June 202516 June 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

Limb lengthening and reconstruction surgeries are advanced orthopaedic procedures used to treat various conditions such as congenital limb discrepancies, traumatic injuries, and deformities caused by infection or bone cancer. These surgeries can significantly improve a patient’s quality of life by restoring mobility, alleviating pain, and improving limb function.

However, the complex nature of these procedures means that, when something goes wrong, the consequences can be severe. If medical professionals fail to follow appropriate clinical guidelines or provide substandard care, patients may be entitled to bring a medical negligence claim.

What is limb lengthening and limb reconstruction?

Limb lengthening is a surgical process used to gradually increase the length of a bone, typically using an external fixator or an internal lengthening device. This may be necessary for patients with:

Congenital limb length discrepancies
Traumatic injuries
Amputations requiring limb equalisation

The process occurs over several months and is usually carried out in carefully planned stages.

Limb reconstruction on the other hand, refers to procedures designed to restore the structure and function of a limb following injury, disease, or deformity. Reconstruction techniques may include:

Bone grafting
Osteotomy (bone realignment)
Use of implants or prosthetics

Any procedure requires meticulous surgical technique, thorough planning and comprehensive postoperative care. Failure at any stage could give rise to complications and in some cases to claims for orthopaedic negligence.

When can medical negligence occur?

Healthcare professionals owe their patients a legal duty of care. They must provide treatment that meets the standard of a reasonably competent practitioner in their field. Negligence occurs when this duty is breached and the breach causes avoidable harm.

To be successful, a medical negligence claim must satisfy two legal tests:

Breach of Duty

It must be shown that the care provided fell below the standard expected of a reasonably competent professional in that specialism. A claim will usually fail if the healthcare provider can demonstrate that a responsible body of clinicians would have acted similarly.

Causation

It must then be proven that, on the balance of probabilities (i.e. more than a 50% chance), the injury or poor outcome would have been avoided had the proper standard of care been met.

Common examples of negligence in limb lengthening and reconstruction

Surgical errors

These procedures require extreme precision. Common errors include:

Incorrect placement of external or internal fixation devices, causing malalignment or deformity
Poor surgical technique resulting in abnormal bone growth or failure to achieve intended length
Damage to nerves, blood vessels, or surrounding tissue during surgery

Inadequate preoperative assessment and consent

A full preoperative assessment is crucial to identify any risks or contraindications. Failures may include:

Incomplete imaging or assessment of bone and soft tissue
Failure to identify underlying conditions affecting healing
Inadequate consent procedures, particularly in paediatric cases where risks are not clearly explained

Poor postoperative monitoring

Post-surgical care is just as important as the surgery itself. Failures here can include:

Not recognising signs of infection, non-union, or delayed healing
Lack of follow-up imaging or clinical reviews
Insufficient rehabilitation advice, impacting mobility and recovery

Improper use or management of medical devices

Limb lengthening devices must be managed correctly throughout treatment. Negligence may occur where:

Devices are improperly adjusted or maintained
There is a failure to act when a device is malfunctioning
Infection or bone damage occurs due to poor hygiene or delayed treatment

Are you a sole director? Your company rules might need a rethink

Posted on 13 June 2025 by Sophie Soraf

If you run a limited company on your own, there’s something you should check—your company’s “Articles of Association”. These are the rules about how your business is run, and most small companies use the default version (called “Model Articles”) when they first set up. But new court rulings have raised concerns about whether these standard rules really work for companies with just one director.

So, what’s the problem?
The issue is whether the standard rules actually allow a sole director to make valid decisions on their own. In some cases, the wording suggests that at least two directors are needed to make things official—even when there’s only one director in the company.

The Conflicting Cases

Hashmi v Lorimer-Wing [2022] EWHC 191 (Ch) (Re Fore Fitness)
In this case, the company had modified Model Articles which stated that a quorum for board meetings required more than one director. When the sole director attempted to make decisions, including bringing a claim on behalf of the company, the court found that the articles did not allow him to act alone. As a result, the sole director’s decisions were deemed invalid. The case raised significant concerns for companies with similar wording in their articles.
Re Active Wear Limited [2022] EWHC 2340 (Ch) (Re Active Wear)
Shortly after, the High Court considered a similar issue. In this instance, the company had adopted unamended Model Articles and again had a sole director. The court ruled that Article 7(2) of the Model Articles does permit a sole director to make decisions on behalf of the company. This decision directly challenged the approach in Re Fore Fitness and provided reassurance to many sole directors.
KRF Services (UK) Ltd [2024] EWHC 2978 (Ch) (KRF Services)
Most recently, the High Court revisited the issue in KRF Services, offering further clarity. The court considered whether a sole director, operating under unamended Model Articles, could validly sign a director’s resolution. The key question was whether Article 11, which requires a quorum of two directors, prevents sole director decision-making. The court reconciled Articles 7(2) and 11, ultimately confirming that where a company has only one director, Article 7(2) takes precedence, and that director can act alone. This decision aligned with the reasoning in Re Active Wear and offers renewed confidence to sole directors using the standard Model Articles.

Why this matters

If your company’s rules are unclear—or if they’ve been changed in the past—you could run into problems later. For example, someone might challenge whether your past decisions are legally valid. That could be a real headache if you’re selling your business, signing contracts, or trying to raise investment.

What should you do now?

If you are a sole director, now is the time to review your company’s Articles of Association; ensuring they are clear, consistent, and allow you to act effectively is crucial to protecting the decisions you make on behalf of the business.

At Tees, we have the expertise to review your articles and advise on whether they are suitable for sole director operation. Where needed, we can suggest and implement amendments to ensure your governance documents are robust, up-to-date, and compliant with the latest legal guidance. Get in touch with the Corporate team to safeguard your company’s decision-making.

Tees advises on landmark joint venture and site acquisition for 73-home Hertfordshire development

Posted on 5 June 202513 June 2025 by Sophie Soraf

Our real estate specialists at Tees have supported Stonebond and Home Group in securing a key development site in Cuffley, Hertfordshire. The site acquisition – backed by a detailed planning consent – will enable the delivery of 73 high-quality homes, with 26 classed as affordable housing and 47 made available for open market sale.

Aaron Cane, Executive Partner at Tees, advised on legal aspects of the land acquisition and joint venture arrangements, representing our Commercial Property team’s skill and expertise in site acquisitions.

The scheme is designed to deliver a 25% biodiversity net gain and includes a £1.5 million contribution to enhance local infrastructure and services. This also marks the first collaboration between Stonebond and Home Group – a significant milestone for both organisations.

Aaron Cane, adviser on the transaction, commented:

“This is a standout project – not just because of its scale, but because it represents a forward-thinking model for partnership development. We’re happy to have supported Stonebond in forming a new strategic relationship with Home Group and we’re pleased to help deliver homes that meet local needs.”

Following completion, Peter Williams, Group COO at Stonebond, said:

“This is an exciting first step in our new partnership with Home Group. We’re delighted to be working together to deliver a mixed-tenure scheme that reflects both quality and community impact.”

Will Gardner, Executive Director at Home Group, added:

“This development is aligned with our mission to deliver high-quality, sustainable homes in the right places. Our partnership with Stonebond brings together aligned values and a shared focus on long-term community outcomes.”

Tees undertakes strategic brand refresh to reflect evolving market position

Posted on 3 June 202513 June 2025 by Sophie Soraf

As part of the firm’s strategic growth plans, and to reflect its evolving service offering, the top 200 law firm Tees has unveiled a significant brand refresh. At a time when the legal sector, like many others, is undergoing considerable change and consolidation, Tees is maintaining its focus on ‘collaborative’ growth – mainly organic – with clients and staff at the very heart of its plans.

The brand refresh is just one element of the firm’s strategy which includes plans to achieving a turnover of £60m by 2028. The most recently published figures (for 2024) show a turnover of £30m with 2025 likely to outturn c.£35m. And, to put the plans into context – in 2020 the figure was £23m. Partner and employee figures currently stand at 28+ and 400+ respectively, increasing from 27 and just under 300 in 2020.

Another change is the increase in the firm’s footprint. Its locations have grown to include six offices across Cambridgeshire, Essex and Hertfordshire. While local offices continue to contribute significantly to one of Tees’ traditional strengths of private client work, the firm’s footprint now extends well outside the southeast. There are few areas across England and Wales that don’t host a Tees client.

Tees’ historic specialism within the agricultural and rural communities has resulted in longstanding relationships, often extending back through many generations. While these relationships have been maintained, increasingly farmers located outside Tees’ traditional heartland – seeking real specialists – have sought Tees’ advice.

In recent times, Tees has built an impressive corporate and commercial team with an expanding client base that reflects its broadened capabilities. The firm now routinely advise on high-value, complex matters for the business community across corporate and commercial, litigation, and commercial property law. Again, location is less of an issue for clients seeking specialists.

Tees will continue to focus on a dual approach: expanding its footprint within the local area and broadening its appeal across England and Wales through the provision of specialist services and working hard to harness the latest technology to ensure the effective and efficient delivery of those services.

The contraction of the traditional high street is influencing the strategic planning of legal firms whose roots lie in the local community. Tees is committed to working in the community but appreciates the need to cater for changing client needs, not least for easier access. This has led to the decision to relocate the Saffron Walden office from its historic high street location to a more accessible location allowing for further expansion and with better parking. This approach also led to the relocation of its Royston office to its new North Hertfordshire Agricultural hub on the same site as the NFU Mutual headquarters.

Despite the advent of AI and the efficiencies it is already bringing to their clients, Tees believe that their ambitious growth plans can predominantly be achieved by increasing partner and staff numbers – great news for the communities it works in. Currently, Tees is the biggest employer in Bishop’s Stortford with a total of 444 staff members, and offices in Brentwood, North Hertfordshire, Cambridge, Chelmsford and Saffron Walden.

Recruiting the right people is a challenge for any business but Tees’ independence and partner-led approach, coupled with a growth culture, stable environment and strong work-life balance credentials, provide considerable attractions to would be employees.

The brand refresh is a key part of Tees’ strategic repositioning, spotlighting its capabilities as a full-service legal practice with an integrated financial services arm. The firm’s independent financial advisers work closely with legal teams to provide joined-up, holistic advice to private individuals, entrepreneurs, and business owners alike.

“This is more than a cosmetic update — it’s a statement about our ambition,” said Managing Director Ashton Hunt. “We’ve built a strong foundation in private client work, but today we’re advising on multimillion-pound transactions and delivering sophisticated legal and financial planning services. Our refreshed brand now gives the full picture and better reflects the complete scope of what we offer.”

Head of Corporate and Commercial, Partner Lucy Folley, added: “We’re seeing increasing demand from businesses that want seamless legal advice across commercial law, property, employment, and dispute resolution. Our growth in this space has been substantial, and the new brand positions us to better reflect and serve that market.”

The firm’s rebrand comes as it continues to grow its regional and national presence, meeting rising client expectations for integrated, forward-thinking legal and financial solutions.

Supreme Court clarifies developer and designer responsibilities under Building Safety Act

Posted on 28 May 202529 May 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd [2025] UKSC 21

In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court has provided vital clarification on the responsibilities of developers and construction professionals when it comes to building safety under the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA).

The background: safety obligations in a post-Grenfell world

Following the Grenfell Tower tragedy, the BSA was introduced to tighten regulations—particularly for high-rise developments. One key change was extending the timeframe for bringing claims under the Defective Premises Act 1972 (DPA).

This case involved BDW Trading Ltd (a major developer) and URS Corporation Ltd (their structural engineering consultant). BDW had discovered serious defects in two high-rise developments—both already sold to homeowners—and carried out remedial works before the enactment of the BSA and without any claim having been brought by homeowners. BDW then sought to recover those costs from URS, raising questions about whether it was legally entitled to do so.

The legal questions

The Court considered four central issues:

Could BDW recover the cost of repairs it had “voluntarily” undertaken?
Did the BSA extend the time limit for BDW’s claims?
Was URS liable to BDW under the DPA even though BDW was a developer, not a homeowner?
Could BDW seek a contribution from URS, even without any direct claim from homeowners?

What the Supreme Court decided

“Voluntary” repairs may still be recoverable

URS claimed BDW’s actions were voluntary and fell outside their duty of care. The Court disagreed. It ruled that developers can recover the cost of safety-critical repairs even if no formal claim has yet been brought by residents. The key issue is whether the response was reasonable in the circumstances—a fact-specific question to be tested at trial.

The Building Safety Act applies broadly

The Court confirmed that section 135 of the BSA doesn’t just extend limitation periods for DPA claims. It also affects claims linked to the DPA—such as negligence and contribution claims. This interpretation reinforces the BSA’s aim of improving accountability across the sector.

Developers are owed a duty under the DPA

URS argued they owed no duty to BDW under the DPA because BDW wasn’t a homeowner. The Court rejected this. It said the duty is owed to homeowners who have acquired an interest in the dwellings and also to whoever commissions the work—layperson or developer alike.

Contribution claims don’t require prior legal action from homeowners

BDW was entitled to bring a claim for contribution even though no homeowner had brought a formal claim. The Court clarified that such claims arise when both parties are liable to the damage which has been suffered by a homeowner and the party seeking contribution has agreed to make compensation to the homeowner—even through “payment in kind”, like repairs.

What this means for the industry

This decision strengthens the legal footing for developers acting proactively to resolve safety issues. It sends a clear message: if you’ve contributed to building defects, you can be held accountable—regardless of whether formal claims have been brought by homeowners.

It also provides:

Greater clarity on how long claimants have to bring proceedings.
Confirmation that developers can seek redress from design professionals and contractors under the DPA.
Assurance that early, reasonable intervention by developers won’t bar them from recovering costs.

How we can help

At Tees, our construction law specialists and Commercial Dispute Resolution and Litigation team are on hand to help you navigate your obligations under the Building Safety Act and the Defective Premises Act. If you’re a developer, contractor or consultant facing questions about building safety or legacy liabilities, we’re ready to support you. Team Members include: Jason Torrance, Duncan Ho, Jessica Barker, Stefania Cuffaro and Daniel Muranyi

Get in touch for a confidential, no-obligation conversation about how the ruling might affect your projects or responsibilities.

Understanding the new Renter’s Rights Bill: Key changes explained

Posted on 28 May 20258 June 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

The Renters’ Rights Bill 2024 is set to bring sweeping reforms to the private rental sector in England and Wales. One of the most significant changes is the proposed abolition of Section 21 notices, often referred to as ‘no fault’ evictions. These currently allow landlords to regain possession of their property by giving tenants two months’ notice, without needing to provide a reason.

On 7 November 2023, the King’s Speech confirmed the Government’s intention to introduce the Renters (Reform) Bill, aiming to provide long-awaited protections for tenants—despite the concerns it has raised among landlords.

The current process: Section 21 Notices

Under the current regime, landlords wishing to serve a Section 21 notice must comply with various statutory requirements, including:

Protecting the tenant’s deposit;
Providing an up-to-date Energy Performance Certificate (EPC);
Issuing a valid Gas Safety Certificate.

Failure to meet these requirements renders a Section 21 notice invalid.

In November 2024, the Ministry of Justice reported the highest number of bailiff-led repossessions in six years—24% higher than in 2023—demonstrating growing pressure on the current system.

What is the Renters’ Rights Bill 2024?

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer pledged to abolish Section 21 notices, and the Government has now introduced the Renters’ Rights Bill 2024 (the Bill), which has passed the committee stage in the House of Lords.

The Bill proposes the abolition of Assured Shorthold Tenancies (ASTs). In their place, all tenancies will become monthly periodic tenancies by default. This change means tenants may remain in their homes indefinitely, unless:

They choose to leave voluntarily; or
A landlord regains possession through a valid Section 8 notice, using one or more of the revised or new statutory grounds.

Key changes to Section 8 Notices

The Bill introduces amendments to the grounds for possession under Section 8 of the Housing Act 1988. These changes aim to strike a balance between tenant protection and landlord rights.

Ground 8: Rent arrears
One of the most significant changes is to Ground 8, which deals with rent arrears. Currently, landlords can serve a Section 8 notice with just two weeks’ notice if a tenant is two months in arrears.

The Bill proposes:

Raising the threshold to three months’ arrears;

Increasing the notice period to four weeks.

This provides tenants with greater time to resolve financial difficulties before facing eviction.

New grounds for Possession

The Bill introduces new grounds for possession, including:

Selling the property – Landlords will be able to serve notice if they intend to sell the property, providing a clear and legitimate basis for recovery of possession.

Other key aspects of the new Renters’ Rights Bill include:

1. A new private rented sector database

A central database will be established to confirm a landlord’s compliance with legal obligations. Landlords seeking to serve a Section 8 notice must demonstrate adherence to statutory requirements.

2. Decent homes standards & awaab’s law

The Bill will extend Awaab’s Law, requiring landlords to investigate and resolve health hazards—such as damp and mould—within specific timeframes. Currently, 12% of private rented homes contain serious hazards.

3. Restrictions on rent increases and upfront payments

The Bill aims to limit financial pressure on tenants by:

Capping upfront rent payments to one month (or 28 days);
Preventing rent increases more than once a year and only to market rates;
Banning “bidding wars” where tenants compete by offering higher rents.

4. Penalties for misuse of possession grounds

Landlords who knowingly misuse a ground for possession may face rent repayment orders—a financial penalty designed to deter abuse of the system.

Challenges and concerns

A major concern is the anticipated increased pressure on the court system. With the removal of Section 21, more possession claims will be routed through the courts under Section 8. Given that it can currently take up to a year for cases to be processed, this raises serious questions about capacity.

The Government acknowledges this and proposes the creation of a new housing ombudsman to handle disputes and complaints from both landlords and tenants in a faster, more cost-effective way.

What happens next?

While the Bill is not yet in force, landlords and tenants alike should prepare for these changes.

Section 21 notices served before the Bill takes effect will remain valid, and those tenancies will still be treated as ASTs for that purpose.
Landlords should ensure they are fully compliant with existing legislation and begin reviewing tenancy agreements in light of the proposed reforms.
Tenants should familiarise themselves with both their current rights and the protections that the Bill will introduce.

Need advice?

If you need advice on the Renters’ Rights Bill, your tenancy agreement, or regaining possession of your property, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with our team.

ESG and corporate governance: A legal duty and a business advantage

Posted on 21 May 202522 May 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

When I first joined Tees, I was pleased to learn what ESG meant, not just as a concept, but what it truly meant to embed environmental, social and governance values throughout our ecosystem. Fast forward to today, I am proud to be a part of a firm that has been shortlisted as “Responsible Employer of the Year” by the UK Property Forum Eastern Echo Awards 2025. But it’s not just about awards, many of us still ask why is ESG so important? What are the genuine legal obligations? And how does it impact corporate growth?

What does ESG mean in a business context?

ESG is about how a company manages risks and opportunities related to environmental, social and governance factors. This can include examples like:

Environmental: Carbon emissions, climate impact, waste reduction, energy efficiency.
Social: Employee wellbeing, diversity and inclusion, human rights.
Governance: Board accountability, executive pay, ethics and anti-corruption

It’s no secret that for many businesses, ESG began its journey as a reputational tool, for example, something that looked good in annual reports and presentation decks. But today ESG is no longer just “the right thing to do”, it’s a critical part of a company’s corporate governance.

ESG is a legal duty

Directors owe duties to act in the best interests of the company and today there is a growing understanding that “best interests” comprises long-term value which includes ESG related issues like environmental impact, workforce practices, supply chain ethics and good corporate governance.

The Companies Act 2006 specifically states under Section 172 that directors must act in a way they consider in “good faith” to “promote the success of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole,” and have regard to factors such as:

The need to foster the company’s business relationships with suppliers, customers and others;
the impact of the company’s operations on the community and the environment; and
the desirability of the company maintaining a reputation for high standards of business conduct.

These are all written in law and form a director’s statutory duties – which means that ESG considerations when they fall within these areas are not optional. They are a legal requirement! Boards that ignore these factors, particularly in today’s world of growing climate, social, and ethical risks could be seen as breaching their statutory duties.

ESG is about action

For lots of businesses I talk to today it remains clear that ESG is no longer just about values or vision statements it’s about taking actual action and implementing policies. A huge legal risk currently in the market is “Greenwashing”. Greenwashing is making inflated or misleading claims about a company’s environmental practices, so for example, relying on historic practices or initiatives to portray a business as more environmentally responsible than it really is. If a company says it’s sustainable, carbon neutral, or ethical, it needs to be able to back it up with real evidence. The time of saying the right things without doing the right things is over.

Various regulators across the UK, in response to rising concerns about corporate greenwashing are tightening their own standards. Smaller and medium sized businesses are expected to adhere to requirements from regulators, industry bodies, and government guidance. Whilst larger limited companies, PLC’s and financial institutions will be required to adhere to the Sustainability Disclosure Standards (SDS) which sets the UK’s ESG reporting standard- this is expected to be finalised this summer.

To sum up, ESG now demands real action and regulators expect proof!

So how does ESG contribute to business growth?

ESG plays a powerful role in shaping how businesses grow, adapt and connect with the people who matter most.

From a personal perspective, ESG aligns with what people care about. I see it first hand amongst my colleagues, friends, and family that people want to work for organisations that they can be proud of, that are inclusive and contribute positively to the world. I know I certainly do! In turn, this can attract top talent and retain staff levels.

Likewise, clients, employers and partners are paying attention to what businesses stand for and trust builds brand loyalty. Those companies caught involved in unethical practices risk reputational damage.

Investors are now also demanding ESG responsibility, failing to meet certain expectations can significantly limit financial gain.

Additionally, risk management is huge, companies with strong ESG policies are able to manage and mitigate risk better – whether it is supply chain issues or governance failures. ESG also drives innovation as it can encourage businesses to find smarter and more sustainable ways to operate.

Finally

Hopefully, it’s clear that ESG is not just about doing good—it’s about doing business well. It is both a legal obligation, a recipe for growth and businesses cannot simply treat ESG as a side issue or branding tool – it must be embedded into the heart of corporate governance and decision-making.

Tees advises on sale of BDM Agencies to Plastic Products Limited

Posted on 14 May 202515 May 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

Tees is pleased to have advised Brian and Rachel Muir on the successful sale of BDM Agencies Limited (BDM) to Plastic Products Limited (PPL), a leading distributor and supplier of thermoplastic reels and sheets.

Founded in 2012, BDM supports overseas companies in promoting and selling their products across the UK and Ireland. The business has also played a key role in sourcing materials for the Source and Retail card markets, as well as supplying polycarbonate and acrylic for ID card projects and PPE partitioning.

After more than a decade of building BDM, Brian and Rachel decided it was the right time to realise the value of their hard work. They sold their shares to PPL, a long-standing business partner of BDM. This acquisition strengthens PPL’s service offering to its clients, expanding its reach and capabilities.

Baljeet Kaur (Partner) led the transaction. Charlie Neal (Solicitor) provided guidance on the disclosure process, and Tees’ Employment team advised on employment matters.

Brian Muir, former Director of BDM, commented: “Rachel and I would like to thank Baljeet Kaur and Charlie Neal for their hard work and professionalism. They ensured we achieved all our goals within the timeline we set.”

Baljeet Kaur, Partner in Tees’ Corporate & Commercial team, added: “Congratulations to Brian and Rachel on the sale of BDM. It was a pleasure to guide them through the process, and we wish them all the best for the future.”

Tees launches new agricultural scholarship with Anglia Ruskin University

Posted on 12 May 202519 May 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

Tees, a leading law firm with over a century of experience supporting agricultural and landed estate clients, is proud to announce the launch of the Tees Agricultural Award in partnership with Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) Writtle. This exciting new initiative aims to provide financial support to promising agriculture students across the East of England.

Recognising the importance of nurturing future leaders in agriculture, Tees will fund two annual prizes over the next three years. The top academic performer will receive £2,000, while the runner-up will be awarded £1,000.

The awards will be based on the second-year results of students studying agriculture degree courses at ARU Writtle. The first awards are expected to be presented in September 2025.

Supporting Future Leaders in Agriculture
Located near Chelmsford, ARU Writtle is a premier centre for undergraduate and postgraduate studies in animal, environmental, agricultural, and horticultural studies. Established in 1893, its 150-hectare campus includes a working farm with livestock, arable crops, and conservation areas, providing hands-on experience for students.

Students from Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Norfolk, and Suffolk are eligible for the scholarships.

A Commitment to Agricultural Excellence

Tees is passionate about celebrating the achievements of these dedicated students. With deep roots in the rural community, Tees’ agricultural advisers possess extensive knowledge of the delicate balance between business, land, and family. Supported by a team of over 30 lawyers, including 10 partners specialising in agriculture, Tees delivers expert advice in a rapidly evolving legal and political landscape.

Letty Glaister, Partner and Head of the Agriculture Team, said:
“Building strong relationships is at the heart of what we do. We’re delighted to partner with ARU Writtle to reward students for their hard work and dedication to agricultural studies.”

Caroline Flanagan, Head of the School of Agriculture, Animal and Environmental Sciences at ARU Writtle, added:
“We’re thrilled to collaborate with Tees. These annual prizes are a fantastic way to recognise our students’ commitment and achievements in agriculture.”

This announcement coincides with Tees’ continued expansion in Hertfordshire, marked by the opening of its North Herts office at Hyde Hall, Buntingford, in April 2025. This location is situated next to the NFU Mutual Hertfordshire office, which further strengthens Tees’ commitment to the agricultural community. Award recipients will be invited to this new office to receive their prizes.

Tees extends its best wishes to all ARU agriculture students as they pursue their studies and contribute to the future of British agriculture.

Founder praises Tees following successful Daycare Nursery sale

Posted on 12 May 20253 June 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

Tees recently advised the sole shareholder and founder of Little Spring Wonders Daycare Nursery (LSW) on the sale of her shares to R & C Becko Limited.

Located in Great Baddow, LSW was founded in 2011 and has cultivated an environment in which children can learn, develop and play. LSW holds outstanding provider accreditation with Ofsted and the staff have been praised by parents for their “inclusive, robust and effective approach” towards the children’s learning and development.

The sale will allow LSW to go from strength to strength and maintain the high standards that the business has achieved. The Buyers have extensive experience of providing early years education and understand the standards and requirements of LSW.

Corporate Partner Baljeet Kaur drove the transaction forward and ensured that the founder was protected and able to step back from the business that she had nurtured. Speaking about the sale, Baljeet described how “it has been a pleasure to work with the founder and help her to leave her business so that she can enjoy a well-earned retirement.”

Following the sale, the founder, Toni Stanford, expressed her thanks to the Tees team: “I truly cannot thank Baljeet enough for her help, assistance, advice and knowledge to make sure the transaction was completed in the best interests of both parties. I would definitely recommend her to anyone else looking to buy or sell a business.”

National Security and Investment: What is the NSI Act?

Posted on 8 May 2025 by Sarah O'Sullivan

The National Security and Investment Act 2021 (‘NSI Act’) introduced a regulatory framework that allows the UK Government to scrutinise and approve certain acquisitions in 17 sensitive areas of the economy that could pose a risk to the UK’s national security. These areas include, but are not limited to, advanced robotics, defence, energy, advanced materials, and artificial intelligence (AI).

For certain acquisitions within these sectors, mandatory notification to the Government is required and these types of transactions are referred to as ‘notifiable acquisitions’. Acquisitions completed before 12 November 2020 do not fall within the NSI Act’s remit and are therefore non-notifiable.

Which entities and assets are covered by NSI Act?

Entities include:

companies;
limited liability partnerships (LLPs);
any other corporate bodies;
general and limited partnerships;
unincorporated associations; and
trusts.

Assets include:

land;
tangible moveable property;
intellectual property (e.g. ideas, information or techniques with economic value).

Which areas are covered under NSI Act?

Certain acquisitions in the following sensitive areas of the economy may require the Government’s approval:

advanced materials;
advanced robotics;
AI;
civil nuclear materials;
communications;
computing hardware;
critical suppliers to the Government;
cryptographic authentication;
data infrastructure;
defence;
energy;
military and dual-use;
quantum technologies;
satellite and space technologies;
suppliers to the emergency services;
synthetic biology; and
transport.

What types of acquisitions are covered under NSI Act?

An acquisition is notifiable if it involves an entity or assets in one of the sensitive areas (‘Qualifying Entities’ and ‘Qualifying Assets’) and meets certain thresholds set by the Government.

In acquiring control of a Qualifying Entity, a transaction will be notifiable if the buyer:

increases its shareholding OR voting rights from:
- 25% or less to more than 25%,
- 50% or less to more than 50%,
- less than 75% to 75% or more, or
the buyer acquires voting rights to secure or prevent the passage of any class of resolution governing the entity’s affairs; or
the acquirer being able to exercise material influence over the qualifying entity’s policy.

In acquiring control of a Qualifying Asset, a transaction will be notifiable if the buyer:

is able to use the Qualifying Asset to a greater extent than prior to the transaction; or
becomes able to direct or control how the Qualifying Asset is used or increases its ability to control the Qualifying Asset.

Does the NSI Act apply to overseas acquisitions?

Yes, the NSI Act applies not only to UK registered entities and UK based assets, but also to international organisations, if they have a connection to the UK. This includes scenarios where an asset is physically located outside of the UK but is used to produce products used in the UK.

Practical implication for businesses

Businesses involved in mergers, acquisitions or investments must assess whether their transaction falls within one of the defined sectors and meets the thresholds set by the Government, if so, requires governmental approval to the transaction. If a party dealing with a notifiable transaction proceeds without Government approval, the transaction will be void and the parties involved may face civil and criminal penalties including up to two years’ imprisonment or fines of up to £10 million or 5% of turnover (whichever is higher).

How long does the Governmental approval take?

Once a notification form is submitted, the Government aims to reply within five working days to confirm whether the form has been accepted for review. If accepted, the review period will take up to 30 working days. The Government may extend this period if additional review is required.

How can we help?

If you have any questions about the NSI Act or whether your transaction may trigger a mandatory notification under the NSI Act, please feel free to get in touch with our Corporate & Commercial team.