From Wednesday 26th July, the government is changing the ‘Statutory Legacy’ sum from £270,000 to £322,000, which means if a person dies without a Will, in addition to being entitled to their personal effects, their spouse or Civil Partner will automatically receive up to £322,000 worth of assets from the deceased’s estate, with the remaining sum split 50/50 between the surviving spouse/Civil Partner and any children.

What if we don’t have children?
If there are no children then the surviving spouse/Civil Partner will automatically inherit everything. But this is only applicable to those who are married or in a Civil Partnership, and doesn’t include cohabiting couples.

Why does Statutory Legacy only apply to married couple or those in a Civil Partnership?
Despite many people believing this to be the case, there is no such thing as a ‘common law spouse’ and therefore, you don’t have the same rights married couples or those in a Civil Partnership.

Without a Will in place, you and your loved ones are unprotected, and instead of following your wishes the distribution of your estate at the point of death, will be determined by fixed rules under UK law.

Is the increase is Statutory Legacy a good thing?
For estates worth less than £322,000, the surviving spouse/Civil Partner will inherit it all. For estates over the new threshold, a split in inheritance could lead to issues for those left behind.

If the deceased owned the family home in their sole name, subject to the value, this new statutory legacy threshold could lead to surviving spouses or Civil Partners being forced to sell the property to release sums due to their children, or including children on the deeds, potentially limiting what the surviving partner can do with the property down the line.

It’s worth noting that the rules of intestacy use an arbitrary system to prioritise distribution of assets, which is limited to: spouse/Civil Partner, children, parents, siblings, grandparents, aunts/uncles, and therefore doesn’t take into consideration step-children, or other dependents you may have.

The only way to guarantee they are included in your estate is to prepare a will.

Could someone dispute the Statutory Legacy?
With the cost of living crisis and an increasing number of second marriages, blended families and unmarried couples, an estate that is distributed under intestacy (without a Will) is more vulnerable to costly challenges and claims from dependents, or those who were given promises of inheritance.

For example, children often feel aggrieved if the home they grew up in is left solely to their step-parent, and likewise surviving cohabiting partners can be forced to effectively challenge the intestacy rules by bringing a claim against their late partner’s estate, if it means losing half of their home to their deceased partner’s children.

Making a Will is something every adult should consider, to protect their loved ones in the future.

We carried out some analysis that has revealed that 4 out of the 5 largest price comparison websites[i] reference a common law spouse – perpetuating the myth that such a relationship status exists and putting people at huge financial risk.

MoneySuperMarket, Go.Compare, Compare the Market and Quote Zone – which have a combined estimated 22 million visits each month – allow users to select that they are in a “common law” relationship, despite no such status being recognised in law.

Our expert family solicitor Karen Jeary has warned that the incorrect language used on price comparison websites adds to the distress caused to those believing they were protected by a “mythical relationship status”.

Karen said: “Throughout my career, I have spoken to numerous unmarried people following the breakdown of their cohabitating relationship who incorrectly believed their positions were similar to married couples and could make similar claims on the breakdown of their relationship.

“However, the current law that applies to cohabitees means it is possible in certain circumstances to live with someone, have children with them and for there to be no ongoing financial responsibility for the former partner – only the children.

“For example, they may have contributed to mortgage payments on a property they did not legally own believing it guaranteed them an interest. Sometimes, they may have invested capital in a property that was in their partner’s sole name. While we may be able to establish that they have a beneficial interest in the property, doing so has an emotional and financial impact.

“In other situations, people have believed they are entitled to a form of maintenance for themselves because they are a ‘common law spouse’ with the reality being the only support will be for any children from that relationship.

“There is a real risk people will take major financial decisions based on their belief in an entirely mythical status and, in doing so, expose themselves to significant amounts of financial insecurity and even litigation. So long as insurance websites and companies perpetuate the myth, people will keep on believing it.

“Family lawyers can – and do – regularly speak up to try and make the position clear, but people interact with price comparison sites a lot more frequently than they do solicitors so it is becoming increasingly difficult to convince people when they are so regularly told the status exists.”

According to the latest government figures, there are currently 3.6 million unmarried couples living together in the UK – an increase of 23% in the past decade. Further research [ii] also revealed that almost half of people (47%) who are looking to buy a house incorrectly believe a status of common law spouse exists, with a further 20% of the difference in rights between married and unmarried couples.

Karen added: “Getting married isn’t for everyone and cohabiting can provide a financially practical option for many couples, especially as we contend with the cost-of-living crisis. However, it is vital that legal protection is put in place in case a relationship fails.

“A cohabitation agreement, which sets out what will happen to joint and separate assets in the event of a break-up, should be the top priority for all unmarried couples planning to move in together. It is especially important to have this agreement in place if the house is in one party’s name only or if children are involved, as protecting your wealth will provide security and help safeguard their future.

“Although this may be an uncomfortable thought, it is important to consider all eventualities and arrange legal protection if something was to go wrong. It is a bit like having insurance – you hope you don’t have to use it, but it is there should the worst happen.

“Ideally, the law should reflect modern life and family lawyers have long pressed the government to introduce some level of rights for cohabiting couples. Sadly, there’s no sign of that happening. Until it does, cohabiting couples need to remember there’s no such thing as a common law spouse and protect themselves accordingly.”

[i] Mayo Wynne Baxter analysed the available relationship options across the five largest price comparison websites in the UK: MoneySupermarket, GoCompare, Compare the Market, Quote Zone and Confused.com.

MoneySupermarket, GoCompare, Compare the Market and Quote Zone all referenced “common law”.

Insurance price comparison website

How cohabiting is referenced

MoneySupermarket

Common law

GoCompare

Common law/living with partner

Confused.com

Living with partner

Compare the Market

Common law-partnered/cohabiting

Quote Zone

Common law

[ii] Mayo Wynne Baxter commissioned Censuswide to survey 504 people who were looking to buy their first or second home within the next 12 months.

I undertook my Training Contract to become a solicitor between 2008 to 2010. I was, in terms of my professional life at least, still very much “in the closet”.

I had joined the firm I trained with along with a cohort of around 15 other trainees. There was a real mix of personalities, backgrounds and interests and it was a real eye-opener for me as I had gone through University believing the vast majority of solicitors were very much from one particular “group” in society – I had gone in with the impression that I and I alone was going to be the one that stood out but that wasn’t the case at all, everyone was different.

It did turn out, however, at least as far as I am aware even to today, that I was alone on one particular front- I was the only gay trainee.

I absolutely didn’t feel like I could let this slip on day one, two, ten or even on the last day of my training contract. Coming out to colleagues, even those that I had begun to consider my friends wasn’t an option. I was even asked the question directly “are you gay” and I said “no”. I don’t recognise that person I was 14 years ago.

I had a very strongly held belief that my career would be hampered by others’ opinion or views on my sexuality. I know now the trainees I had grown close to, socialized with, bonded with over our usual trainee gripes, fundraised with and struggled with would have absolutely supported me and it wouldn’t have made a difference as to how they treated me – but they weren’t the decision makers.

The decision makers were older, cis gendered, straight men and women and rightly or wrongly I assumed they wouldn’t have given me the same chances as my fellow trainees if they knew I was a gay man. I don’t recall seeing anyone else who was openly “out” in the office, I had no one to lean on or learn from and I certainly didn’t feel I could be myself in a professional office environment.

Fortunately for me, a friend came into my life at about the right time and they were the first person I felt I could be open and honest with and she enabled me to be myself outside of work primarily. Ironically, she was actually someone I worked with. Having a friendly face in and out of the office meant I could begin to be my more authentic self but never to the point of being an “openly gay man”. She was an ally in every sense of the word and emphasised to me the importance of having these people in your life!

It wasn’t until I qualified and began to feel a little more control over my future, that I was able to bring my true self to work and not shy away from discussing my life outside of work with colleagues – something I had avoided doing as much as possible before.

I won’t forget the first time I positively affirmed my sexuality at work as I felt a rush of adrenalin and fear when it rolled off my tongue but the reaction was one of total nonchalance – perfect. The conversation went like this, “you have a girlfriend right?” “no, I have a boyfriend,” “ah ok, cool, what’s his name?”

That was it, the plaster had been removed.

It is very difficult to appreciate how my work life has changed since 2008 to now and so much of this is down to culture changes in the office and wider society around acceptance and the value of welcoming all people from different backgrounds, characteristics and views at higher levels in businesses.

Since then, the firm I worked with underwent quite a significant change in culture and moved away from the quite stuffy firm it was to what is now a very friendly, open and accepting one where being yourself is recognised as a strength. Seeing other members of the LGBTQ+ community at senior levels in the firm provides reassurance that it isn’t a barrier.

I felt empowered to organise the firm’s inaugural participation in the Birmingham Pride Parade, I have represented members of the LGBTQ+ community on open discussion forums broadcast to staff, actively participated in LGBT Pride Month activities and have even been able to reach out to the LGBTQ+ community as potential clients for the firm by taking part in local networks designed to encourage members of the community to build links, grow their referral relationships and otherwise come together and support queer business owners and leaders.

There is still a long way to go in some respects when it comes to ending stigma and discrimination in all areas of life but when it comes to work – a place you spend so much of your time and energy, it is very reassuring that the vast majority of firms have taken such strides in helping to create environments where everyone feels comfortable to be themselves. I see a lot of trainees and more junior members of the firm actively partaking in LGBTQ+ inclusion groups and involving all members of staff in discussions about the community and I see many allies both old and new supporting them and it’s lovely to see. I wonder how my career would have taken a different path if I had simply had the courage to bring more of myself to work each day.

Just one final point and it was in fact the final message from our CEO at a recent firmwide partner conference – “Keep being yourself”. If that doesn’t sign this off appropriately, I don’t really know what else would.

Matt Parr, private client partner at Mayo Wynne Baxter.

The proposed abolition of section 21 evictions will introduce a simpler and more secure tenancy for a tenant. As “no fault evictions” will no longer exist, a landlord would have to have a valid ground for possession of the property, meaning that a tenant would have to have breached one of the clauses of the tenancy agreement. Currently, Section 21 allows landlords to reclaim their property with two months’ notice without the tenant being at fault, if the tenancy’s fixed term has ended.

To ensure that landlords remain able to obtain possession of their property if genuinely required, the grounds for possession are set to be reformed with the addition of new grounds under Section 8 of The Housing Act which will allow landlords to sell or move close family members into the property, or evict their tenant if redevelopment is taking place. After a tenant has lived in a property for six months, their landlord will be able to evict them under these “reasonable circumstances”. In addition to this, the grounds dealing with persistent rent arrears and anti-social behaviour will be strengthened.

Landlords will still need to serve notice on the prescribed form to their tenant with the required notice period. If a tenant does not leave the property, the landlord will need to go to court and provide evidence that the ground applies before being awarded possession.

The intention is for tenancies to be simplified by transitioning all tenancies to periodic tenancies, meaning that a tenancy would only end if the tenant chose to leave and provided two months’ notice to their landlord, or if the landlord had a valid reason to seek possession.

As well as the abolition of Section 21, the Bill will limit landlords to one rental increase per year. There will also be a new ombudsman for private landlords appointed to oversee independent investigations of landlords when tenants have made complaints, with the potential of the tenant being awarded up to £25,000 in compensation from landlords deemed to have acted improperly.

The Bill still needs to pass through parliament, but there is likely to be two stages to the abolition process. Stage one will transition all new tenancies to periodic agreements, and stage 2 will move all existing tenancies to the new system under a date given by the Secretary of State.

It is likely that it will take several months for the Bill to become law and there is also the possibility that the content of the Bill will change during the parliamentary process which began on 17 May 2023.

If you would like to talk about any of the matters above, please contact us on 0800 84 94 101

We are so pleased to announce the Air Ambulance Charity Kent Surrey and Sussex (KSS) as our new charity partner for the next two years.

The team from MWB visited the KSS Redhill Aerodrome to meet its doctors, paramedics, and crew, as well as the chance to see its life-saving helicopters in action.

Employees at the law firm voted to support KSS because of the vital service it delivers, and they are already organising fundraisers to contribute to the charity’s £45,000 daily operating costs.

Dean Orgill, chief executive partner at Mayo Wynne Baxter, said: “It was a privilege for the team to meet the heroes who work at KSS and we are proud to support their work.

“It’s important to us that we support charities which take care of our local community and as Mayo Wynne Baxter expands from our Sussex heartland into Kent and Surrey, we wanted to select a charity which would represent our current and future employees.

“We know that 87% of the charities’ total income comes from donations. Every year it responds to more than 3,000 incidents where they provide cutting edge pre-hospital care, which could mean the difference between life and death.”

KSS is an independent lifesaving charity, which has provided world-leading pre-hospital emergency care whenever and wherever it’s needed, for more than 30 years. Operating 24 hours a day, 365 day a year it delivers the hospital room to the road side, a beach or a patient’s home.

KSS recorded its busiest year in its history in 2022, where it responded to more than 3,000 incidents, an average of nine patients every day.

We will be planning a calendar of fundraising activities and challenges, from office fundraising classics such as bake sales and raffles, to participating in KSS Heli Hike sponsored walks.

Kelly Heaton-Ralph, executive director of fundraising and philanthropy at KSS, said: “We are incredibly grateful to the employees of Mayo Wynne Baxter for voting for KSS as their Charity of the Year!

“We are excited to be able to work together on a number of fundraisers throughout the year, further raising the profile of KSS in Sussex, Surrey and beyond and building a strong partnership together.”

If you’d like to support KSS Air Ambulance, visit their website!

The clinical negligence team of Lime Solicitors is expanding its geographical reach into the South East with the transfer of seven experts from Sussex-based firm Mayo Wynne Baxter.

The move from Mayo Wynne Baxter has been a year in the making after the historic South East firm joined legal and professional services group Ampa in 2022, of which Lime Solicitors is its core consumer negligence brand.

Experts transferring to Lime Solicitors includes partners Gail Waller, Melanie Minter and Nick Garish, solicitors Stephanie Shorer and Natassja Hanlon, as well as trainee Sam Durrant and paralegal Andrea Roberts. The team boasts almost 100 years’ combined experience in clinical negligence claims, including still births, cerebral palsy, spinal injury, gynaecology and delayed diagnosis.

The transferring team will remain working in Brighton and surrounding areas.

Gail Waller, partner and clinical negligence expert, said: “We work incredibly hard for our clients and transferring to the Lime Solicitors brand will give us an even bigger pool of experts to share best practice with, work on key challenges and help even more people.

“We share a very similar approach to Lime Solicitors; focussing on early rehabilitation for our clients to ensure best quality of life, or targeting that much-needed apology for closure, particularly for surviving family members in fatal claims.

“While the first duty of a healthcare system is to do no harm, sometimes things go wrong and care falls below an acceptable standard, which can result in injuries or health complications.

“Clinical negligence claims play a critical role in safeguarding patients against negligent treatment, ensuring healthcare professionals learn from their mistakes to prevent something similar happening in the future – that’s why giving our clients a voice and fighting for them and their families is so important.”

Lime Solicitors’ clinical negligence team started in 2010 with partners Robert Rose, Neil Clayton and Nikki Fahey. It was based solely in Leicester until Neil relocated to London to develop the wider team in the capital.

In 2021, the London team welcomed several new experts when they transferred from Hudgell Solicitors and in 2022 the firm grew roots in the West Midlands. Since then, the team has grown to more than 45 people.

Head of clinical negligence Robert Rose said: “We’re thrilled that the Mayo Wynne Baxter team will be joining our brand and maintaining firm roots in the South East.

“They bring with them tonnes of experience and expert knowledge, we look forward to working together and obtaining closure, compensation, provider apologies and rehabilitative support for more people who need it.”

Press contacts 

Jemma Page – jemma.page@shma.co.uk, 0796 720 7603, 0115 945 4617

About Lime Solicitors

Lime Solicitors specialises in legal services for people and their families, offering nationwide assistance for personal injury, medical negligence, abuse, employment disputes, inheritance disputes, and professional negligence.

The firm’s expert team stands up for the rights of individuals and works with them to achieve the best possible outcomes, providing transparent, approachable and sensitive legal advice.

In 2023, Lime Solicitors was awarded the Platinum Trusted Service Award by review platform Feefo – an independent seal of excellence that recognises businesses for delivering exceptional experiences.

Part of legal and professional services group Ampa, Lime Solicitors is a certified B Corporation, meaning it has been verified by B Lab to meet high standards of social and environmental performance, transparency, and accountability.

The firm has been listed in Best Companies 2022 as one of the top 100 best large companies to work for in the UK. It also ranked as a top 25 law firm, top 75 East Midlands company, top 75 West Midlands company, and top 50 large London company to work for.

Lime Solicitors has hubs in London, Milton Keynes, Birmingham, Solihull, Stratford-upon-Avon, Bristol, Nottingham, Leicester, Lincoln and Sheffield.

For more information, visit limesolicitors.co.uk.

Under current Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards (‘MEES Regulations’) a Landlord cannot lawfully grant a lease of a non-domestic property where the property does not have a valid EPC with a rating of F or G. This applies to both brand-new leases and the renewal of existing leases.

The MEES Regulations were initially introduced in 2013. These have since been reviewed and from 1 April 2023, it will be unlawful for a Landlord to grant a further lease or continue letting a non-domestic property pursuant to an existing lease if that property has an energy rating of F or G.

Looking further into the future, the government has plans for the minimum ratings to increase over the next 7 years. From 1 April 2027 the minimum rating required to lawfully let non-domestic properties will be C, and by 1 April 2030, a rating of B. Landlords as well as potential buyers of non-domestic properties should therefore be mindful of the future increases as the costs and inconvenience of works over the years could be significant.

Leases should also be drafted and interpreted carefully to ascertain whether the relevant provisions in a lease allow the Landlord to recover the costs of improvements from the Tenant.
Where a Landlord does not comply with the above requirements, they could be subject to a penalty based on 10-20% of the rateable value of the property. This is subject to a minimum fine of £5,000 and a maximum fine of £150,000. Enforcement is carried out by local Weights and Measures Authorities.

There are some exceptions. Some properties do not require an EPC at all. Other properties that do require an EPC, but do not meet the minimum rating requirements may not need to carry out works to improve the EPC rating if they can prove and rely on a legitimate reason as set out in the MEES Regulations. In that scenario, a Landlord must register the property on the ‘Private Rented Sector (PRS) Exemption Register’. Only then will a Landlord be exempt from the minimum EPC rating requirements and enforcement action.

If you are a Landlord and do not have a valid EPC, or an existing EPC with a rating of F or G, we strongly recommend that you instruct an energy assessor to carry out an assessment of your property as soon as possible. They will then be able to advise on any works required to improve the EPC as necessary as well as any exemptions you may be able to rely on.

Baby Arthur was an undiagnosed footling breech who died three days after becoming stuck during a planned homebirth
A delay in transferring him and mum Stephanie to the hospital materially contributed to his death, an inquest found
Parents Stephanie and Matt Trott, of Burgess Hill, West Sussex, highlighting the tell-tale signs of breech babies in the hopes of saving another family’s heartbreak
The couple have purchased a piece of land as a legacy to their first-born child and have plans to use the space as a place for people to find peace in stressful times
All planned homebirths in Sussex are now being offered presentation scans at 38 weeks, which has already identified two babies who were unknown breech
Gail Waller at MWB is fighting for answers on behalf of the couple as part of a medical negligence claim against South East Coast Ambulance NHS Foundation Trust.
A couple who lost their first-born child after he became stuck during a planned homebirth are fighting to raise awareness of the signs of breech babies in a bid to save another family’s heartbreak – as part of a medical negligence claim supported by us.

Baby Arthur was an undiagnosed footling breech who became stuck during a planned home delivery in May 2021. By the time mum Stephanie Trott was transferred to hospital, Arthur had suffered an irrecoverable hypoxic brain injury and his life support was withdrawn three days after his birth.

At an inquest into his death in November 2022, the coroner concluded that South East Coast Ambulance NHS Foundation Trust’s delay in transferring Arthur and his mum to Princess Royal Hospital materially contributed to his death.

Stephanie, 33, said: “Life without Arthur is very painful – there is a real gap in our family where he should be and it will forever feel like a part of us is missing. He dominates our life and we are constantly thinking about him.

“My pregnancy was very straightforward – I seemed to glide through it. Everyone told me how much pregnancy suited me and no problems cropped up along the way. As I was classed as low-risk and we live less than 10 minutes away from our local hospital, I decided to have a home birth. I’d done a lot of research into hypnobirthing and I thought I could be more relaxed in a familiar environment.

“On the day of Arthur’s birth, I woke up in the early hours of the morning with a cramping tummy ache and knew something was happening. We rang the Princess Royal Hospital so we were on their radar, which is the case with planned homebirths.

“My mum was with me at the time because we were living in my parents’ annex. She kept saying how close together the contractions were – there was no break or lull in-between. I started to push and that is when a foot emerged so Matt phoned 999.”

When paramedics arrived at 5.45am, Arthur’s feet were delivered. At 5.57am, he had delivered to his mid-shin, and at 6.02am, he had advanced to his nipple line and was noted to be pink, kicking and well perfused. However, a communication breakdown between ambulance crews on the ground and the control centre meant Stephanie was kept at home until 6.28am. By the time she arrived at the hospital at 6.36am, Arthur was white, floppy and his umbilical cord was no longer pulsating with blood flow, meaning he was effectively starved of oxygen.

At the inquest, Assistant Coroner Dr Karen Henderson said “I don’t underestimate the difficulty of moving [Stephanie] but that is what should have happened. I am satisfied that there was a missed opportunity to transfer her to hospital and that attempting delivery at home was not sound practice.” She went on to conclude that “Arthur died following an undiagnosed footling breech where a delay in transfer to hospital materially contributed to him suffering severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy.”

Dad Matt, 37, said: “It was the most traumatic thing we have ever experienced. You could hear the panic and confusion in everyone’s voices – one minute they were told to go to hospital, the next minute to stay. When the critical care paramedic arrived, he was surprised we were still at home because it was such a medical emergency.

“Since Arthur’s death, we both have doubts in the system, whereas we didn’t have those previously. We’re more hesitant when asking for help because we don’t know if we can trust professionals. We try and come up with the answers ourselves before seeking help at the last minute.”

As a result of Arthur’s death, all planned homebirths in Sussex are being offered a presentation scan at 38 weeks. At the time of Arthur’s inquest, this had been offered to 75 families, 65 of which had taken it up, identifying two babies who were unknown breech.

South East Coast Ambulance NHS Foundation Trust has also started liaising with NHS trusts throughout the South East to install red emergency phones in the labour wards of hospitals so crews transferring acute obstetric emergencies to hospital have a direct line to midwives and obstetricians, rather than A&E. The first of these phones was installed at the Royal Sussex County Hospital in Brighton in November 2021.

Furthermore, the Association of Ambulance Chief Executives has changed its guidance for ambulance services and paramedics around footling breeches to provide clarification that the mother should be rapidly transported to hospital.

Stephanie, who gave birth to her second child, daughter Primrose, eight months ago, said: “Any changes are in the right direction and really positive. I broke down at the inquest when I found out two babies had been identified as breech as a result of the scan because Arthur could have potentially saved those children.”

Matt, a veterinary practice manager, added: “The only problem is that there is no guarantee these initiatives will be rolled out nationally. As far as we’re aware, they are only happening in Sussex, but these learnings should be standardised and enforced across the country to stop another parent having to sacrifice their little one in order for changes to occur.”

As a legacy to their son, Stephanie and Matt purchased a four-acre piece of land in East Sussex, named Arthur’s Patch, where they have planted 250 native woodland trees; created a vegetable patch, a pond named after their daughter, wildflower area and a children’s play area; and installed a cabin with tea and coffee-making facilities.

Currently, they open the space up to family and friends on Saturday mornings, but eventually, they hope to create a community space where grieving parents and people suffering other losses can visit in times of need.

Stephanie said: “The vision is to create somewhere that people and nature can thrive together. Going through this, we had Arthur’s Patch to plough our grief into and we genuinely don’t know what we’d have done without that. We had somewhere to escape, plant and watch things grow. It has helped us so much and made us feel better.”

Stephanie and Matt contacted Mayo Wynne Baxter in October 2021 following guidance from the coroner’s office.

Stephanie said: “We felt out of our depth. We were grieving, distraught, and we didn’t think we’d be able to handle the inquest by ourselves. We spoke to the coroner’s assistant who said we should explore being represented legally.

“If anything, we want to ensure this doesn’t happen to another family. I’ve since found out that I had all the tell-tale signs of a footling breech – such as feeling kicks in my lower stomach and a hard swelling below my ribs – but I didn’t know what they were. If I’d have read the symptoms, I’d have thought to get help and have another scan.

“We really are happy with the changes that have been made by the ambulance trust since Arthur’s death but these need to be rolled out nationally. Any compensation we are rewarded as a result of our claim will, of course, go straight into further developing Arthur’s Patch and help us in creating a space for those who need nature to heal during tough times.”

Gail Waller, one of our medical negligence partners is assisting Stephanie and Matt throughout their claim. She said: “This really is a heartbreaking and traumatic case.”

“There was a window of opportunity, as highlighted at the inquest, when paramedics first arrived on the scene. Stephanie should have been taken to the hospital when Arthur was still pink and kicking. However, the delay in this happening effectively starved Arthur of oxygen and contributed to his death.”

“It is positive that there have been clear learnings from Stephanie and Matt’s tragic experience. Both the ambulance trust and the hospital trust have made changes as a result, which will undoubtedly save lives. However, these initiatives must be rolled out nationally to prevent other babies dying.”

We are expanding our presence on the South East coast, we are merging with Eastbourne firm Lawson Lewis Blakers.

The union will see Lawson Lewis Blakers become part of the Mayo Wynne Baxter brand, taking the team to more than 220 people and adding £2 million to our turnover.

Acting for businesses, people and their families in Eastbourne, Peacehaven and Lewes, Lawson Lewis Blakers has significant experience in private client and family law, residential property, employment, commercial transactions and litigation.

No money will exchange hands as part of the merger and there are no planned redundancies. MWB will provide career progression and development opportunities for those joining from Lawson Lewis Blakers and continues to proactively recruit talented teams and individuals across the region.

Jeremy Sogno, director at Lawson Lewis Blakers, said: “We were looking for a larger organisation that shared our values and could offer greater growth opportunities for our talented and ambitious team, as well as providing additional services and expertise to our valued clients; Mayo Wynne Baxter more than fits these criteria, and we are excited about joining forces and continuing our legacy within the local area.”

With origins traced as far back as 1835, Lawson Lewis Blakers is no stranger to mergers, with the latest iteration of the brand forming when Lawson Lewis & Co and Blaker Son & Young merged in October 2012. MWB is also a firm steeped in history, having served the local community for more than 150 years.

Dean Orgill, chief executive partner at MWB, said: “Lawson Lewis Blakers is a long-standing firm with an excellent reputation and an ambition to grow – for its people and its clients. We see ourselves being stronger together and look forward to welcoming the whole team to the Mayo Wynne Baxter brand.”

Lawson Lewis Blakers’ Peacehaven office will become our eighth hub in the Sussex area, expanding our geographical footprint and remaining close to existing clients in the area. The deal is expected to complete later this year.

We are part of legal and professional services group Ampa, and this partnership with Lawson Lewis Blakers is in line with the wider group strategy of investing in and bolstering the brands within the group portfolio to truly unlock their potential.

Ampa, which has recently achieved B Corporation accreditation, also includes full-service Midlands law firm Shakespeare Martineau, national consumer legal brand Lime Solicitors, uninsured loss recovery experts Corclaim, planning consultancy Marrons Planning and cyber security experts CSS Assure.

The Ampa group of brands has been named as one of the UK’s top 100 large companies to work for as well as top 25 law firms in the Best Companies list 2022.

All Ampa brands are recruiting talented lateral hires and teams, and the group is proactively looking for like-minded businesses to join the group as either standalone brands or bolt-ons to its existing portfolio.

It has long been thought that the laws in England and Wales which govern the disposal of bodies are outdated and in need of modernization. Many of the laws still applicable today have roots in the 19th century and do not reflect societies changing attitudes and advances in science.

There is no property in a dead body – no one can own a dead body.
Currently, the person entitled to possession of a body is the person under a duty to dispose of the body. It would make sense, therefore, that who is entitled to dispose of the body can change over time following someone’s death – i.e. the hospital, the Coroner’s office, the personal representatives or others entitled under the intestacy rules.

Following a cremation, ashes can only be handed over to the person who delivered the body for cremation but there is no definition of “ashes” – does it mean, all of the ashes, some of the ashes, are they in a sense “the body” and therefore cannot be owned?

Currently, the law does not ensure that a person’s own wishes as to how their body is disposed of are carried out. In fact, the only section in someone’s Will that is generally not legally binding is the “funeral wishes”.

It will not come as much of a surprise that disputes amongst families after the death of a loved one often arise around issues such as funeral arrangements and differing views on how to dispose of the body. The process is a very emotive one and a change in the law to recognise the deceased’s own wishes as binding will help to avoid such disagreements.

It could be argued that if there is no property in a dead body then how can the body be gifted or disposed of by a will, bought or sold – yet statute does permit a body to be donated for medicine or science. If you or a loved one does wish to have their body used in this way, arrangements should be made in advance with the chosen educational/research facility. Visit the Human Tissue Authority’s website and find your local/chosen medical school and follow their own procedures.

The Law Commission is currently in the Pre-consultation stage of a review of the laws regarding disposals of a body. They seek to recognize newer methods of disposal besides the traditional cremation and burial, many of which are already being used in other countries.

The current law is piecemeal and complex and as a result of the consultation, the Law Commission may make recommendations as to the need to change laws in this area. This may result in the need for many clients to update their Wills or prepare codicils stipulating their funeral wishes, especially if there is risk of disputes in the family or your own cultures/beliefs stipulate a particular method of disposal.

Please call us if you need any help or advice, 0800 84 94 101.