Welcome to the first edition of Fieldfisher's Partnerships Update, the alerter that looks at the latest issues affecting those involved in managing partnerships, limited partnerships and LLPs.
In this edition we focus on:
1. the Government's ongoing consultation on the tax rules for partnerships and how this will affect your business
Earlier this year, HMRC started a consultation on two aspects of the partnership tax rules with a view to:
- clarifying the difference between self-employment and an employment relationship with regard to LLP members; and
- countering the manipulation of profit or loss allocations to achieve a tax advantage.
Find out what you need to be doing to prepare for when the final results are published >
2. whether a mandatory retirement age of 65 always amounts to age discrimination – recent employment case law has ruled that this isn't always the case
This summer saw the end of the long drawn out litigation brought by Leslie Seldon, a former partner of law firm Clarkson, Wright & Jakes, against his former firm that its mandatory retirement age of 65 was age discriminatory. An Employment Tribunal found that Clarkson, Wright & Jakes' mandatory retirement age of 65 was a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of work force planning and staff retention and therefore did not amount to direct age discrimination.
Do you have a justifiable retirement age in your partnership agreement? >
3. a recent hedge fund case where the judgement was deemed to entail "harsh results" for the Appellant.
In a recent hedge fund case (Ilott v Williams (2013) EWCA Civ 645), the Court of Appeal delivered a judgement which it admitted entailed "harsh results" for the Appellant.
Mr Ilott, was appealing against a decision to dismiss his claim for a share of the profits in an asset management business following his dismissal.
Does your partnership agreement specify precise terms for exiting partners? >
We hope you find this of interest.
The Partnerships Team at Fieldfisher
Sign up to our email digest