Confronting Your Superiors After A Work Accident

The likelihood of a work accident is highly likely depending on your employment. This is why certain occupations have insurance policies before you even begin working -- such as being a chemist or working aboard a vessel full of volatile material.

But for common workplaces a slip-trip-fall accident could mean carelessness on your part. But if you know that a negligence took place, you could approach your superiors regarding the incident.

Talk To Them Privately

Employers have a responsibility to keep your workplace safe from harm so you could continue to work effectively. Approach your superior and tell them that a certain object, obstacle, activity, renovation or anything had caused your accident.

If you believe there is blame on your employer's side, talk to your superiors privately and suggest they keep an open mind on the subject at hand.

Tackle the Issue

Evidence is the key to knowing whether or not you have a potential workplace accident claim.

For example, you had a slip-trip-fall accident because of a substance spill in the restroom. Without someone to clean the restroom and put up a warning sign of wet flooring, the employers themselves are in questionable responsibility for your injuries.

Remember, employers need to make sure your workplace -- including restrooms -- are well-prepared and maintained.

Specialist Legal Team

If your superior continues not to mind your issue or dismiss you immediately, it would be wiser to work with no win no fee accident at work solicitors and also have them act as your legal representation.

The issue should not have any repercussions with your job as it is the employer's responsibility to ensure your safety and the financial costs and recovery damages involved.

UK Barrister Says No Chance of UK Retaining EU Rights

According to Prof Alan Vaughan Lowe QC, the Brexit's price is the re-negotiation of the UK's partnership and place with the European Union. He said the chances of EU citizens settled in Britain retaining all their rights for living, working and retirement in the United Kingdom after the July vote will be zero.

According to Professor Lowe, the issue was not because of the 1.3 million Britons abroad and 3 million EU citizens and immigrants living in the United Kingdom would be most affected by the 

Brexit but rather the people and government not sure of what to do next.

Limited number of rights are likely to remain according to experts. The right to own property and contractual rights is only protected by international law.

Prof Lowe said:

“If it’s been drafted with future citizens in mind, you would take a different view of rights that would naturally fade out with mortality,” he said.

The chair of the committee, Helena Kennedy, said the complexity of the so-called acquired rights was a concern to millions who wanted to plan their futures. Could any reassurances be given?

“Absolutely no,” Lowe replied. “I think there is zero chance [that the] … existing legal system affecting European nationals in this country will not change.”

The Chaos in The Labour Leadership Struggle

If there's anything Jeremy Corbyn finds himself in right now it's in deep waters.

Currently haggling between leadership, influence and rejection, the Labour leader is facing condemnations all over while the party moves to ban the 130,000 new MPs voting in its leadership election.

The party said the NEC needed to block the new members before January 12 even if it would seem they broke the rules doing so.

All Labour members may have to shell out about tens of thousands of pounds to resolve the issue immediately.

Blair ally Lord Falconer backed the appeal against five members who crowdfunded £30,000 online, telling the Mirror it was about making the NEC independent of the courts.

But Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell said the appeal was undermining democracy and pointed the finger of blame at deputy leader Tom Watson.

Labour's ruling National Executive Committee (NEC) denied a leadership vote to anyone who joined the party after January 12.

The decision enraged more than 100,000 Labour members who joined in the two weeks after the EU referendum alone.

Five of them argued Labour's rule book doesn't give the NEC the power to lock them out of democracy.

On Monday a High Court judge agreed with them. He said: "In my firm judgement, the rule book gives the NEC no such power."

Labour Donor Challenges Labour NEC's Decision Over Jeremy Corbyn

Losing about 73% of Labour MP confidence, senior MP Angela Eagle had filed to exclude Mr Corbyn from the leadership ballot.

However, the 33-member Labour National Executive Commission (NEC) voted by 18 votes to 14 that Mr Corbyn be included in the ballot. The results came after six hours of closed-door discussions.

Former Parliamentary Candidate and Labour Donor Michael Foster has filed a legal application with the High Court to overturn the decision made by the Labour NEC.

According to Deputy Labour leader Tom Watson, Mr Foster's actions is "unhelpful".

"This legal challenge is very unhelpful and destabilising to the Labour Party. The NEC made a decision," he said.

"They ruled that Jeremy Corbyn is automatically on the ballot paper. We must respect that decision and give our members a choice of candidates as soon as possible"

Mr Foster said that if the case is heard, a ruling can be made within days.

"It's about the rule of law," he said.

"There were three bits of legal advice from different QCs, all of which were contrarian and none of 

the people in the room were unbiased in the view of that advice.

"The advice that was taken was certainly not given the expert consideration that it would receive from a High Court judge and everyone in the room had a different political agenda."

Legal Name Billboards: What Do They Mean?

I'm pretty sure you've seen this in several areas and villages all over London and probably in almost every region of the United Kingdom.

The billboard reads "LEGAL NAME FRAUD. THE TRUTH. IT'S ILLEGAL TO USE A LEGAL NAME."

The advertisement is seemingly ridiculous. I first thought it was all about illegally using a legal name of someone who just passed. But it is indeed puzzling to know what it meant when it said that.

On its website, LegalNameFraud.com, you could see when your birth was registered. However, it said the name is different from the person as it will always be distinct.

Sounds creepy and disturbing at the same time.

I investigated the matter and landed on this BBC article written by Jon Kelly. He found out it was written by a certain "Kate of Gaia" who may have transcended from Freemen-on-the-Land, a movement that expired long ago. The movement said it was not bound by law if they didn't choose to be.

When he emailed this Kate of Gaia, it never responded about who funded the billboards. Instead, it just said Google 'legal name fraud' and read the essays like others did. She also said she was a real journalist compared to a BBC pair-rot.

Seven complaints about the posters have come up from the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).

"Some questioned whether it would lead law-abiding people into thinking they've committed fraud or a crime by having a name," a spokesman said.

Landmark Court Ruling Could See Tightening Of Truancy Laws

Jon Platt had taken his daughter to a vacation holiday in Florida's Disneyland despite lacking approval from her school.

The Isle of Wight concil fined Platt £60 for truancy or unauthorised absenteeism of her daughter. As per UK law, children kept out of school by their parents will have their families receive a fine of £60 per abenteeism.

Platt had refused to pay the fine, which had the council double it to £120 in total. Platt argued that his daughter's overall attendance record was not included in the fine's issue.

According to the Department for Education, the government would look to introduce legislation that would help close any loophole. The DfE was "disappointed" with the High Court's decision to favour 

Platt's argument.

According to an official statement:

“We are confident our policy to reduce school absence is clear and correct. We will examine today’s judgment in detail but are clear that children’s attendance at school is non-negotiable, so we will now look to change the legislation," said a DfE spokesperson.

However, English councils urged the government to allow schools to take a "common sense approach" and "give individual consideration" to parents' requests.

The Local Government Association said: “Children’s education is treated with the upmost seriousness, but it is clear that the current system does not always favour families, especially those that are struggling to meet the demands of modern life or have unconventional work commitments.

“Families where parents work unsocial shift patterns, in the emergency services or whose jobs are tied to calendar commitments, can find that they are unable to take family holidays during school holiday periods.”

UK Must Do Something About Saudi's Use Of Defence Provisions

Britain denies it has any role in the massacre of Yemen and other inhumane uses of UK defence contractor weapons, which the country exports to the strong Middle Eastern nation.

According to Matrix Chambers' Phillipe Sanders QC, the UK must review the evidence presented that Saudi Arabia used UK weaponry in a valid manner.

The UK enjoys a huge sale of £6.7 billion to Saudi Arabia in defence projects and contracts. About £2.8 billion had gone to the airstrikes against Yemen.

Evidence presented to the UK includes civilian targeting proved by a UN inquiry. The inquiry shows that there had been "widespread and systematic" targeting of civilians in the Yemen incident. 

According to the UN, this violates humanitarian law, including camps for internally displaced persons and refugees.

Saudi Arabia has received about 72 Eurofighter Typhoon Jets. Arms sales to Saudi Arabia had increased by £2.95 billion for the first nine months of 2015.

Menawhile, the UK government said the licenses provided to Saudi Arabia remains as they see the country using the equipment in compliance with humanitarian requirements the license entails.

Cameron said “We have the strictest rules for arms exports of almost any country anywhere in the world. And let me remind him that we are not a member of the Saudi-led coalition, we are not directly involved in the Saudi-led coalition’s operations, British personnel are not involved in carrying out strikes.