Bonus Advance Agreement

JLT Speciality Limited against James Craven focused on the effective date of the defendant`s resignation, the interpretation of the contract text and whether the clause requiring the refund of the full bonus was unlawful and unenforceable (although the last point was not pursued at the hearing). The court rejected Craven`s argument that JLT`s September 29 letter that his employment relationship would end on January 1, 2017 was an accepted amendment to the contract. The £500,000 bonus was refundable if his employment relationship ended on or before 31 December 2016. The Court of Appeal allowed the JLT to be summarily adjudicated and cut short Craven`s legal arguments about maintaining the bonus. The agreement provided that he would receive an advance of £500,000, but this was supported by a repayment clause that explicitly stated that if Craven resigned on or before 31 December 2016, the advance would be fully refundable. How can employers ensure that the contractual bonus clauses they set are clear? Alison Downie reports in light of a recent decision of the Craven Court of Appeal did not challenge it. JLT again wrote to him that his contract would break out on December 31, 2016, and asked for the full bonus refund. The judgment has cut short some of the arguments of Craven`s defence and contains some useful points for interpreting the treaties. On September 29, 2015, JLT wrote that the resignation had been accepted and that Craven`s employment would end on January 1, 2017.

On August 5, 2016, JLT wrote that the last day of employment of the 31. December 2016. On August 25, 2016, Craven wrote that he would maintain his 12-month notice. JLT responded that his current notice was more than 12 months, so the last day of his employment would be December 31, 2016. Judge says the organization that does not deal with a colleague`s comments created an „intimidating, hostile, degrading and degrading” atmosphere for black railroad workers The consequences of the shutdown are simple: the employer was supported by reasonably clear and clear language in the additional clauses and their written clarification (finally) of the exact date of termination. Each employee must carefully review the details of these clauses and ensure that they meet all the conditions for non-reimbursement if they wish to avoid this. The BBC`s new impartiality guideline could prevent staff from participating in marches and demonstrations. People Management is looking into the legality of this charity says it costs the economy £23 billion a year and is calling for legal paid leave to reduce the bill in the longer term for businesses and taxpayers Employers` responsibility to help employed women struggling with symptoms, says Alex Christen. .

. .