The International Lawyers Network condemns in the strongest possible terms the reckless and unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine. We join with the International Bar Association in their statement against this blatant breach of international law and send our support to our member firm, PETERKA & PARTNERS Ukraine, and their families, as well as the citizens affected. We hope for an end to the war as soon as possible.
The International Lawyers Network (ILN) is a leading association of 91 high-quality, full-service independent law firms.
Since 1988, the ILN has helped its members keep pace with today’s global economy, through access to the tremendous strength and depth of the combined expertise of 5,000 lawyers in 66 countries on six continents.
ILN member firms are among the most respected and most experienced counsel in their jurisdictions. Clients’ increasing need for reliable foreign counsel is well-met by the personalized, high-quality and cost-effective legal services provided by ILN member firms. Unique to the ILN are the strong personal and professional relationships among its members and their clients developed over the past 30 years. Far from a mere directory, the ILN is an affiliation of lawyers who gather on a regional and worldwide basis annually and work routinely with each other to address client requirements and needs.
Each of the ILN’s member firms is international in outlook and staffed by highly trained senior attorneys, who are experts in a broad range of practice areas. ILN members have demonstrated experience in working successfully with international companies. They are independent, mid-sized firms within their jurisdictions, and are committed to the focus of the International Lawyers Network, admitted to the Network only after a rigorous application process. The ILN provides clients with high-quality service from experienced local counsel who work in firms that maintain excellent reputations in their own countries. This means that clients have immediate access to attorneys who are native, both linguistically and culturally, to the country of interest.
The ILN’s international directory app is available for iPhone, Android and BlackBerry smartphones. To access the app, click here or log on to ILNmobile.com from your smartphone. Request more information about ILN membership here.
In the wake of the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, employers have been pondering the group health plan implications if Roe v. Wade is overturned, which would remove the federal protection of abortion rights and enable each state to set its own legal requirements regarding abortions. Without Roe, an estimated 26 states either already have laws on their books banning or severely restricting access to abortions, or are likely to pass such laws. This means that group health plan coverage of abortions may be available to participants in certain states and not others. The below provides an overview of group health plan considerations that plan sponsors and administrators should review with counsel if the Supreme Court’s final decision, expected by the end of June, tracks the leaked draft. Read more…
The Honourable Steve J. Reimnitz of the Superior Court recently revisited the rules regarding fraud and the warranty for latent defects in the case of St-Pierre c. Benoit, 2021 QCCS 5491.
In 2015, the plaintiffs purchased a property from the defendant built by the latter in 1993–1994. This contract was concluded following the plaintiffs’ visit and that of a pre-purchase inspector, at the end of which no anomalies were noted. The seller’s declaration also did not mention any particular problem with the building. The parties therefore agreed to the sale of the building by including a clause excluding the legal warranty: the sale was therefore at the buyers’ risk.
On Thursday, May 12, 2022, New York City Mayor Adams signed the bill (previously described here) amending New York City’s new law that requires employers to list wage or salary ranges on job advertisements. Most significantly, among other changes, the amendment pushes the effective date of the law from May 15, 2022, to November 1, 2022.
Many of you who read this blog will know that last week, there was a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion on Roe v. Wade that indicated that the Court plans to overturn it.
I have a lot of feelings about this leaked draft, as a woman, as an American, as more information continues to come out from states around my country. Those feelings have often made it difficult to concentrate and focus on the things I would like to, to be as driven as I normally would be as my very rights are in question.
Where is the impact of alleged employment discrimination? That is the question when evaluating whether a remote worker can assert claims under the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL”) and New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”), according to a recent decision by U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos. Relying on state law, Judge Ramos concluded that the basis for subject matter jurisdiction has not changed during the COVID-19 pandemic and remains grounded in New York’s “Impact Test,” meaning courts will look to where the impact of alleged discriminatory conduct was felt. Thus, regardless of whether an employer is located in New York, the anti-discrimination laws are intended to protect employees who live or work in New York.
The seemingly relentless passage of state privacy legislation continues as Connecticut enacts its own comprehensive consumer privacy regulation. On May 10, 2022, Governor Ned Lamont signed into law An Act Concerning Personal Data Privacy and Online Monitoring (CTDPA). The new law will go into effect on July 1, 2023, the same date as the effective date of the new Colorado privacy law. Read more…
Video: Flexible Work Arrangement Policies, State-Level Privacy Laws Increasing, AI and Disability Bias – Employment Law This Week
As featured in #WorkforceWednesday: This week, we examine best practices for crafting flexible work arrangement policies. Requests to continue working remotely or with flexibility remain high as we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Superior Court of California Attorneys’ Fees Award Punishes Plaintiff’s Bad-Faith Litigation for Alleged Misappropriation of Trade Secrets
A California Superior Court Judge in Orange County granted an attorneys’ fees award in the amount of $5.8 million to defendant Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc. (“Landmark”) in Contemporary Services Corporation v. Landmark Event Staffing Services, Inc., Case No. 30-2009-00123939. This ruling reinforces the importance of carefully calibrating litigation strategy in trade secrets misappropriation cases to focus on vindicating legally protectable interests. Trade secrets litigation should not be used merely as an aggressive tactic to stifle a competitor.
Employees who resign from work, sue their employer, and assert “constructive discharge” shoulder a heavy burden to demonstrate that they had no choice but to resign. A recent decision of the Massachusetts Appeals Court, Armato v. Town of Stoneham, shows just how heavy that burden is.
On May 9, 2022, the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) announced a new final rule, to be published on May 11, 2022, expanding export controls against Russia under the Export Administration Regulations (“EAR”). The final rule imposes a license requirement under 15 C.F.R § 746.5(a)(1)(ii) for exports, reexports, or transfers (in-country) to or within Russia for additional items subject to the EAR identified under specific Harmonized Tariff Schedule (“HTS”) descriptions. The final rule adds 205 HTS codes at the 6-digit level (and descriptions) and 478 corresponding 10-digit Schedule B numbers (and descriptions) to the chart in Supplement No. 4 to Part 746.