Blackadders Solicitor Samera Ali talks about the differences in Scottish & Islamic Inheritance Law in her first Vlog.
Click here to watch the full video: https://lnkd.in/e-Jx95G
For more information on Wills and setting one up please contact our Private Client team by visiting www.blackadders.co.uk
Christmas is a time for giving and there are several ways to make over cash or assets to someone as efficiently as possible when it comes to inheritance tax (IHT).
IHT is only currently payable on any portion of your estate that is above a threshold of £325,000, and is charged at 40%, however this is reduced to 36% if you donate 10% or more of your estate to charity. If you are thinking of gifting assets or cash as presents this year, then read on to ensure that your gifts do not fall foul of IHT.
1. Small gifts
If you are in a position to do so, get Christmas covered by making use of the small gifts exemption. You can gift up to £250 each year to as many different people as you like in any one tax year (6 April to the following 5 April) without being liable for IHT.
2. Annual allowance
Over and above the small gifts exemption you can gift up to £3,000 in each tax year without paying IHT. You can carry forward all or any part of the £3,000 exemption you don’t use to the next year but no further. This means you could give away up to £6,000 in any one year if you haven’t used any of your exemption from the year before.
3. Gifts out of regular income
A less well known but very useful relief is the gifts out of income relief. Any gifts you make from surplus income as opposed to capital are free from IHT if they are part of your regular expenditure. There is no limit on the sums gifted provided the gifts do not impact on your normal living standards in that the funds used to make the gift are indeed surplus. This means that you could make regular monthly or annual gifts of the difference between your income for the year and your expenses for the year without them falling into your estate, but you do need to document the intention to provide HMRC after your death if your estate is liable for IHT. If for example, your income is £150,000 p.a but you only spend £100,000, then you could give away the remaining £50,000 without it counting as a gift for IHT purposes.
4. Gifts to exempt beneficiaries
(a) Spouses: If you are married or in a civil partnership, you can give anything you own to your spouse or civil partner if their permanent home is in the UK so your estate won’t have to pay IHT on what the gift is worth. Gifts to an unmarried partner, will not benefit from this exemption.
(b) Charities: A lot of us gift to charity at this time of year so remember any donations to charities based in the UK are exempt from IHT. If you use the gift aid scheme you can also save on income tax.
(c) National institutions, such as museums, universities and the National Trust as well as UK political parties are exempt.
5. Weddings
The festive season often means a family wedding and gifts in contemplation of marriage are exempt from Inheritance
Tax up to certain amounts:
• parents can each give £5,000
• grandparents and other relatives can each give £2,500
• anyone else can give £1,000
You have to make the gift on or shortly before the date of the wedding or civil partnership ceremony.
You can still make gifts that do not fall into any of the above groups. These gifts will be treated as potentially exempt transfers (PETS). On the basis you do not benefit from these gifts and provided you live for at least 7 years, such gifts should be free of IHT.
So with Christmas fast approaching, enjoy stress free gifting without worrying about IHT this festive season.
For more information please contact the Blackadders Executries team.
December – the chaos of Seasonal festivities, workload deadlines, travel disruption and notorious office parties has begun.
As the song goes “So this is Christmas”! While the fortnight before the Yuletide break can offer a welcome opportunity for colleagues to relax and celebrate, the festive period also presents its own unique employment law challenges.
For many business and HR managers, Christmas resembles levels of fear and trepidation similar to those experienced by Dickens’ miserly employer, Ebeneezer Scrooge. Fortunately, Loch Employment Law has a gift of 12 tips for the festive countdown to help employers navigate through the nightmare before Christmas:
1. Christmas Party Liabilities
Despite work events such as the office party now taking place off site and outside of work hours, they are still an extension of the office environment.
Alcohol consumption can lead to unwanted conduct, such as discrimination and violence, with Tribunal decisions clearly finding employers liable for such inappropriate acts carried out by their employees. It’s important therefore to remind staff of the standards of conduct.
Employers must be clear that any misconduct that occurs during the party and after, if some of the colleagues decide to continue elsewhere, will be subject to disciplinary action.
2. Discrimination, Bullying & Harassment
Christmas gatherings often present an opportunity for some employees to flirt with their office ‘crush’ in a more social environment. However, the line between ‘banter’ and sexual harassment is subjective and can be a fine one.
Employers can be vicariously liable for sexual harassment so it’s sensible to remind employees that discriminatory remarks or behaviour will not be tolerated. One step employers can take is to update their dignity at work and bullying and harassment policies to include references to work-related social events.
3. ‘Secret Santa’
Secret Santa presents are a great way for colleagues to have some fun and treat each other. However, it can also mean that inappropriate gifts are sometimes given anonymously. Items of an offensive or sexual nature can be embarrassing for some staff and discriminatory to others.
New employees or interns may not know what kind of presents are appropriate for their team. Circulating ground rules for the gift exchange will help prevent the giving of unsuitable items.
4. Christmas Promises
Managers should avoid talking about promotion prospects, performance and remuneration with their employees at Christmas parties. In Judge v Crown Leisure Limited the EAT held that a promise of a significant wage increase made by a manager at the Christmas party was not contractually enforceable because there was no intent for it to be so. Mr. Judge had resigned, claiming constructive unfair dismissal when his salary increase did not come to fruition. The EAT considered the context of the conversation at the party and concluded that it was not intended to be contractually binding.
Although the result was in favour of the employer that time it’s better to remind managers to avoid conducting informal appraisals whilst propping up the bar, to eliminate the potential for future litigation, or unhappy employees.
5. Social Media ‘Surprises’
Remind employees that workplace and social media policies still apply during the Christmas period and outside working hours.
It should made be clear to staff that posting content on social media which could damage the reputation of the employer may be a disciplinary issue. This includes drunken rants about their boss, or comments that could be seen to be bullying or harassment of colleagues.
Employees may post pictures from the Christmas ‘do’ that present the company in an unprofessional light to clients and suppliers. If this is a concern, it’s best for employers to remind staff to be wary and exercise discretion when posting images.
6. Grievance or Grinch?
If an employee does raise concerns about something that has occurred at an office party, HR should treat it the same as any other complaint. It is important to avoid dismissing complaints or deeming inappropriate jokes or remarks to be simply ‘party banter’. Allegations of misconduct at a Christmas party are as serious as those brought up in the office.
If an intoxicated colleague confides in you about concerns they have it is best to ask them to discuss it with you on a confidential basis once you are back at the office. If they do not raise it again, you could mention the subject to find out if they wish to discuss it the next day. Employees who voice their apprehensions under the influence of alcohol may be less willing to revisit concerns back at the office. However if it is a genuine concern, encouraging them to open up is the best approach.
Any investigations should be conducted professionally and thoroughly. Equally, management should act to deal with inappropriate behaviour as and when it is reported.
7. Holiday Discrimination
Whether or not employees are religious, many enjoy getting into the spirit of the holiday season. However, not everyone celebrates Christmas. This does not mean treating those who do more favourably, or granting holiday requests to those with children just because Schools are closed. Holiday requests should be treated equally, though personal circumstances may be considered in order to be fair and reasonable.
For some industries such as retail and hospitality, this will be the busiest time of year which means some staff will be required to work on Public Holidays. Holiday entitlement during this period should be based on the business needs of the employer and they should be in a position to objectively justify denying requests if staff request time off for religious reasons.
Favouring one group of employees over another around religious holidays and festivals exposes employers to successful discrimination claims.
8. Happy (Untaken) Holidays?
On the topic of holidays, employees often ask if they can carry over their untaken holidays into the New Year.
The Working Time Regulations prevent statutory annual leave entitlement being exchanged for payment in lieu. However, there are some situations such as long term sickness preventing an employee from taking accrued statutory holidays. Unused holiday can then be carried over. If you wanted to, you could allow employees to carry forward any accrued holidays in excess of the minimum statutory entitlement of 20 days.
9. Bonus Entitlement
Some organisations pay Christmas bonuses as a gesture of goodwill in December. If this becomes a regular, unqualified habit, employees can argue that this forms a ‘custom & practice’ and has become a contractual entitlement. To retain flexibility around festive bonuses employers must ensure that employment contracts specify the bonus is only paid at the discretion of the employer, and that a bonus is not a contractual entitlement. Varying what you do each Christmas will always help here.
10. The Xmas ‘Flu’
The festive period can often lead to high levels of absenteeism – sometimes conveniently the day after the office party!
Employees should be reminded that they are expected to attend work the next day in a fit state unless they have booked the day off as annual leave. Employers often expect staff to be rather weary the morning after the night before. However, consistency is important when dealing with unacceptable absenteeism. Employees should be made aware that lack of attendance without a valid reason can be treated as a disciplinary issue, as with any other unauthorised absence.
If there are employees who need to drive or operate machinery the day after the office party, employers must be mindful that they may still be under the influence of alcohol. Employees must be reminded that it will be their responsibility to ensure they drink sensibly at the event and are safe and legal to perform their duties the next day.
If there are concerns about an employee’s fitness to safely perform their duties it is worth considering suspending the employee to investigate further in accordance with their disciplinary policy.
11. Stay Safe
Health and Safety obligations should be considered with an element of common sense and measure. Additionally, reasonable risk assessments must be conducted when choosing locations for Christmas events or decorating the office. Employers must be mindful that they could be liable for health and safety incidents that may occur during a work party.
Ending the official event near a train station or bus stop will make it easier for employees to plan their safe return home. If a member of staff has had too much to drink, then an employer should consider taking some responsibility for ensuring they get home safely or are at least being looked after by a friend or colleague.
12. #BlackIceMonday
Finally, UK employers faced considerable disruption earlier this month as the freezing temperatures and blizzards resulted in travel being disrupted and many employees not being able to get to work.
Employees who choose not to attend work due to weather disruption are not statutorily entitled to be paid and should take the day as annual leave or unpaid leave if they stay at home. It may be possible for some workers to make up the time at a later date.
If an employee is away from home and cannot travel home, then they should be paid for this time (if they are paid on an hourly basis) as they are still performing duties and could be requested to work remotely. Alternatively, employers could allow the employee to take time off in lieu.
Some employers allow staff to work remotely from home if it is practical and productive. This avoids the pressure on employees to commute in dangerous conditions. Employers should have adverse weather policies in place to manage these situations and be clear on whether or not if staff will be paid for days when they have not been able to attend work.
The festive season should be an enjoyable time for everyone and following our 12 tips will mean you can avoid a January hangover. If you need help with any of the issues we’ve raised then get in touch with our team of experts.
Living Wills are not yet legally binding in Scotland, however a recent case in England shows that medical staff are putting greater emphasis on respecting the wishes of patients.
A Living Will, also known as an Advance Directive, is a document that allows you to declare your views on receiving life-prolonging medical treatment should you become seriously ill and are no longer able to make decisions on your own health care. A Living Will can set out your wishes in general terms or it can detail your prospective refusal of any specific procedures or treatments that are aimed at prolonging your life. Such treatments could include cardiopulmonary resuscitation, artificial ventilation, invasive surgery or blood transfusion.
In the recent case of Brenda Grant, from Warwickshire, medical staff had misplaced her Living Will which resulted in her receiving life-prolonging treatment for almost two years following a stroke, contrary to her written wishes. Unfortunately, Mrs Grant had not made her family aware of her wishes or the existence of the Living Will and it was only once her GP discovered the document within her medical notes that the medical treatment was stopped. In an out-of-court settlement, the George Eliot Hospital Trust admitted liability and agreed to pay £45,000 in damages to Mrs Grant’s family.
Creating a Living Will allows you to formally express your wishes so that they may be given effect when you are no longer able to make decisions regarding your health or welfare. The aim of the medical profession has historically been to prolong life but as the number of suffers of age related conditions grow, it is essential that consideration is also given to the views of the patient. Many of us will now have experienced family members who have suffered from the indignity of their degradation and would not wish to have the same experience. The hospital trust’s admission that they acted improperly in not ensuring that their patient’s wishes were followed shows that the medical profession understand that there is now a balance to be found.
If you create a Living Will, we always recommend that you let your family and friends know that you have done so to ensure that it is not mislaid within your medical notes. We would also provide you with a copy of the Living Will for your personal papers and your doctor with a copy for their file. For more information on Living Wills please contact Blackadders.
It was announced yesterday that Prince Harry has become engaged to US actress and star of TV show Suits (Rachel Zane), Meghan Markle.
With the wedding predicted to take place in May 2018, there is much speculation about whether Prince Harry and Meghan Markle would or should enter into a pre-nuptial agreement prior to their marriage.
Currently around 50% of marriages end in divorce.
What is a pre-nuptial agreement?
A pre-nuptial agreement is a contract. It can be used to regulate the division of assets upon divorce or death.
Are pre-nuptial agreements enforceable in Scotland?
Although pre-nuptial agreements are untested in the Scottish courts, Scotland has long recognised that people should be able to enter into contracts as they wish. Pre-nuptial agreements are therefore valid in Scotland and the courts may take one into account provided that it was fair and reasonable at the time it was entered in to.
Why have a pre-nuptial agreement?
The most common desire is to protect assets owned prior to a marriage; or assets that are inherited or gifted to one party so that they remain the property of that person and do not go into the matrimonial pot for division. The division of such assets are often the subject of contentious and bitter arguments in a divorce, with much time and money being spent arguing about how these assets should be divided fairly. A pre-nuptial agreement can exclude such assets from the equation. They provide a degree of certainty. Without a pre-nuptial agreement, the statutory provisions apply leaving scope for parties and lawyers to argue about it.
Should they or shouldn’t they?
Pre-nuptial agreements often criticised as being unromantic or as being indicative that one does not love or trust their partner enough. In my opinion, pre-nuptial agreements encourage a couple to be honest and upfront with one another about their financial situation and their expectations for the marriage in a responsible and realistic way.
“You mean more to me than anything in the world and I need you to believe me…” Rachel Zane, Suits.
Not just where marriage is in contemplation…
With cohabiting couples now having limited rights to make a financial claim when the cohabitation comes to an end, a pre-cohabitation agreement can be entered into in the same way as a pre-nuptial agreement. For more information on pre-nuptial agreements please contact Blackadders Family Law team.
The introduction of Part 10 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2016 has brought, as many are aware, an improvement in the options available to a 1991 Act tenant when considering a transfer of an interest in the tenancy.
Whereas under the existing Agricultural Holdings legislation it was already an option to the tenant to transfer his interest in a 1991 Act Tenancy either on death or during his lifetime, the category of people who could benefit from such a transfer without the risk of an incontestable notice to quit from the landlord, i.e. the “near relative successor” group, was quite narrowly defined. The near relative successors, who benefit from the availability of restrictive grounds of objection available to the landlord, originally only included the surviving spouse, surviving civil partner or a natural or adopted child of the tenant. The near relative successor group was expanded in 2012 with the addition of a grandchild. Although this was a welcome step forward, it did not provide a solution to tenants who wished to retain the interest in the 1991 Act Tenancy within the wider family. Particularly where in a farming business involving a brother or sister or other close relatives where there were no children of the tenant.
As most tenants and landlords are aware, the near relative group has now been expanded to a much larger family group which includes for e.g. a parent, a son or daughter-in-law, a sibling, a sister or brother-in-law or their further offspring. This widening of the “protected” group of successors does give the tenant who is planning for succession after death or upon retirement during lifetime a much wider choice as to who may benefit after his death or retirement from his interest in the tenancy. This of course has to be looked at hand in hand with a number of other provisions in the 2016 Act such as the Amnesty provisions for Tenant’s improvements and not in the least, the provisions relating to the Relinquishing and Assignation of Holdings. The latter in general terms, allows a 1991 Act tenant to serve notice on his landlord that he will quit the holding provided the landlord pays him the compensation provided for in the Act. If the compensation is not paid or the landlord does not wish to accept the tenant’s proposal, the tenant is then free to assign his interest in the tenancy to a new entrant to farming or to an individual who is progressing in farming.
So how may this work in practice? Imagine a scenario where a 1991 Act tenant does have children, however they are not interested in continuing on the farm, nor in taking on the tenancy interest. The current tenant does however wish to secure the value of his tenancy for his own family and children. Before the 2016 Act the tenant did not have many options available to him. Unless an agreement could be reached with the Landlord, he could, as many did, continue on as a tenant on the farm until his death. If there was nobody to transfer the interest to at that point, the tenancy would most likely terminate with any available way going claims becoming available to the tenant’s estate. The real value of the interest in the tenancy, however, would be lost.
Under the 2016 Act the tenant now has a number of options. Firstly, the tenant may either upon his death or during his lifetime assign his interest in the tenancy to a family member within the wider near relative group, for example, a nephew. In Which case, the value of the tenant’s interest would be secured within the wider family. However, this does not provide for a value to be transferred to the tenant’s own children. We need to consider whether in such a scenario, the payment of a premium by the proposed new tenant is an option. I don’t see why it could not be. As such we would effectively see a “sale” of the 1991 Act tenancy interest, thus providing for a value to be made available to the original 1991 Act tenant and his own family, children etc. Secondly, the tenant may decide to retire and make use of the relinquishment and assignation provisions. Again this would secure for the tenant either a compensation payment by the landlord or payment of a premium by the new entrant or individual progressing in farming who is to receive the benefit of an assignation of the lease.
It does not take much imagination to envisage the creation of a market in 1991 Act tenancies available for assignation. Whether this would result in increased availability of tenancies to new entrants remains to be seen.
We are seeing increased activity from Landlords with a rise in the number of discussions taking place between Landlords and Tenants on a possible relinquishment of the tenancy. This of course before the relevant provisions are in force in law and no doubt in anticipation thereof.
It is important, now perhaps more than ever, for tenant farmers to carefully consider their succession planning, this hand in hand with the opportunities offered for increased value as a result of the Amnesty provisions in relation to tenant’s improvements. When considering options careful consideration needs to be given to the effect any actions proposed may have on the tenant’s Inheritance Tax position and other applicable taxes and more particularly the effect of retirement or transfer on the available Business Property and Agricultural Property Reliefs available.
For more information on land transactions and tenancies please contact the Rural Land and Business team at Blackadders.
A lot of people think that if you park your car in a private car park owned by, for example, the local supermarket or a big hotel, and you get a penalty ticket due to overstaying, or not being a customer, you don’t have to pay it. “Only the state can fine people”, they say, “and since when is Morrison’s the state?”
You may also hear: “There’s no law of trespass in Scotland. I can’t charge you £85 just because you walked into my front garden, can I?” Or: “If this is legal, what’s to stop them charging you a million pounds?” So the advice about the penalty ticket is – bin it. But is that correct?
Normally a matter as trivial as an £85 parking ticket would barely make it to the Sheriff Court, and we would be left guessing what the law on the matter might be. But, extraordinarily, a case deciding this very point went all the way to the Supreme Court in 2015, and the judgment makes for interesting reading.
The case concerns a Mr Beavis, who left his car in the car park attached to the Riverside Retail Park in Chelmsford. There were about 20 signs at the entrance to the car park and at frequent intervals inside it, all large and prominent, so that any reasonable user of the car park would have had a fair opportunity to read them. The wording, mostly in black print on an orange background, was:
“2 hours maximum stay. Failure to comply with the following will result in a Parking Charge of £85. Parking limited to 2 hours (no return within 1 hour).”
The court held that this amounted to a contract between Mr Beavis and the car park. Mr Beavis had permission to park his car in terms of the notice posted at the entrance, which he accepted by entering the site. He was well aware of the terms when he parked, or ought to have been aware of them. Those terms were that he would stay for not more than two hours, and that if he overstayed he would pay £85.
Mr Beavis’ solicitors accepted that there was a contract, but argued that the £85 charge fell foul of a well-established rule that “penalty clauses” in contracts are unenforceable. These are clauses in contracts which say that in the event of a breach, the defaulting party will pay some exorbitant amount of money to the other party, out of all proportion to any loss which can have been suffered. The car park, they said, had not suffered any loss at all in reality, so the purported charge was simply intended as a punishment, and was an unenforceable penalty.
The Supreme Court disagreed. They thought that it was perfectly reasonable for the car park to discourage inconsiderate motorists from occupying parking spaces for too long, thereby reducing the space available to other members of the public. Also, the charges were necessary so that the car park could make a profit and be able to stay open. In these circumstances the car park had a legitimate interest in imposing the £85 penalty, and this was the only reasonably practicable way to enforce its interests. £85 was not out of the way in all the circumstances, bearing in mind the usual level of penalties imposed by traffic wardens on public streets.
So, Mr Beavis had to pay up. Fortunately for him, this was a test case for the car parking industry and it had been agreed that there would be no cost implications for him in taking the case to the Supreme Court, or it would have been the most expensive parking ticket in history.
In April this year a similar case appeared in the humbler surroundings of Dundee Sheriff Court. In this case a Ms Mackie persistently parked in a private car park outside a relative’s house. Signs showing the parking terms and warning her of the penalties for overstaying were displayed prominently. She ignored the signs and binned the penalty notices as she received them, eventually racking up a total of £18,500 in penalties. Sheriff George Way found her liable to pay the car park this sum, on the same reasoning as the Beavis case.
The correct legal position is therefore that if you drive to a private car park where the terms and conditions are clearly displayed along with a warning of the penalty charges, and you park there, you may be agreeing to those charges. So long as the penalty charge is not unreasonable, the likelihood is that will be liable to pay it.
Of course, the situation would be different if the terms and conditions of parking were not clearly displayed, or if the penalty were a ridiculously huge sum. Also, intriguing legal arguments could still spring up in other circumstances over whether a landowner has a “legitimate interest” in imposing a penalty on trespassers. However, in most cases, it seems that if you get a private parking ticket the “just bin it” advice is not good.
For more information or advise on this, contact the Dispute Resolution team at Blackadders.
Reflecting the firm’s steady growth and commitment to nurturing talent, leading UK Law firm Shepherd and Wedderburn has promoted 11 solicitors to the position of Associate across its offices in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and London.
The total number of associates and solicitors now stands at 148, with the firm wide headcount at approximately 500. With a premier client portfolio and a reputation for the highest quality service, the firm is renowned for its ability to innovate and handle unique, unprecedented projects.
Stephen Gibb, Chief Executive, Shepherd and Wedderburn said: “This is a really strong group of new associates, and reflects the strength in depth and quality of our people across the business. Our strategy has always been to provide first-class expertise combined with personal service and I know that our new associates will play a key role in delivering this. This group in particular has demonstrated a strong professional ethos and an unwavering commitment to our clients and colleagues. Their promotions are well deserved.”
The new associates are Gina Johnston, Chris Garden and Charles Boyne who specialise in Commercial Disputes & Regulation; Alison Blair in Banking & Finance; Flora Asplin in the Private Client team; and Chris Devlin, Ian Mack, Stephen Maughan, Stephanie Mill, Emma Paton and Julian Poullain in Property & Infrastructure.
For those of us still hooked on the TV show, “The Apprentice”, you are bound to have noticed that nothing invokes the scorn of Lord Sugar more than when candidates describe their goods or services with a dash of creative licence.
Whether it be organic burgers that aren’t so organic or French mussels which are more at home in Brighton than Brittany there is a real legal reason why Lord Sugar has to come down hard when candidates push the truth a little too far.
The primary legislation governing this area is called the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and this lays out the various rights consumers in Britain enjoy when buying goods and services. When it comes to the description of goods, the law requires that every contract is deemed to have an implied term that the goods will match the description given by the seller. It doesn’t matter if the goods were available for inspection or if the seller later amends the description; if the original description is false then the buyer has certain legal rights.
In general these rights entitle a consumer who has been mis-sold a product to either reject the goods (subject to certain time-scales); obtain repair or replacement of the goods; or, have the purchase price reduced to reflect the mis-description.
The law further protects consumers by presuming that any mis-description discovered by the consumer within 6 months from when the goods were delivered existed at the time when the product was originally bought and it is up to the seller to prove otherwise.
In addition to these civil legal rights that consumers enjoy, Trading Standards Officers also have the power to bring quasi-criminal proceedings against those who have deliberately or recklessly mis-sold goods and services. Accordingly, it is hardly surprising that Lord Sugar keeps a careful eye on the activities of his candidates and hopefully this reinforces the point that mis-selling goods is no light matter.
If you have been mis-sold goods or services or have any questions arising from the contents of this blog please contact our Dispute Resolution Team who will be happy to assist you.
Leading law firm Thorntons was crowned Best Large Employer for a second year running last night at Scotland’s Best Employer Awards 2017.
The firm, which employs more than 420 employees across its 10 offices, collected the accolade at the Awards Ceremony in Glasgow on Thursday 12 October. Thorntons was also shortlisted for the Youth Investment Award which recognises businesses that demonstrate a commitment to recruiting, engaging and developing young people.
Colin Graham, Chairman at Thorntons, said: “We are delighted to be awarded this title and recognised at the ceremony for a second consecutive year.
“Investing in training and development of our people is crucial to the future of our business, as well as the legal profession as a whole, and we are proud of the services we offer to our growing teams.
“Developing our own highly-skilled people is very much part of our growth strategy and will improve our overall client experience. Training new recruits also helps upskill our existing team because none of us ever stop learning, regardless of our level.”
The Business Insider Best Employer Awards aim to recognise and reward companies who put employees at the heart of their business, promoting development and health and wellbeing to strive in their industry.
Thorntons was awarded two titles at last year’s ceremony – Large Scottish Employer of the Year and Best Scottish Employer of the Year at Scotland’s Best Employer Awards 2016.
