Yesterday, the California Supreme Court issued an important ruling in a case that had the potential to profoundly affect how public entities budget and pay for publicly funded projects in California, Busker v. Wabtec Corp. (Cal., Aug. 16, 2021,No. S251135) __ Cal.5th __, 2021 WL 3612126 ...
A breakdown of the ICO’s recent guidance on how to comply with the UK’s data protection regime when making live marketing calls. The ambiguous lyrics from this popular song have left me confused ...
This is a question that arises with some regularity in trust administration, and one to which the English Court has offered a very welcome answer in the recent case of Sarah Butler-Sloss & Others v Charity Commission [2022] EWHC 974. This case has potentially wide-ranging implications and in this article we will focus on those relevant to trustees of Guernsey-law trusts ...
The decision will be relevant for parties seeking to bring claims in the BVI courts where there are competing jurisdictions and systems of law at play. Funders and ATE insurers will also find the decision of interest where they are considering the merits of funding cross-border claims involving BVI defendants. A copy of the judgment is available here. Background WWRT had commenced proceedings in the BVI against Carosan, a BVI company, and BK, a Ukrainian businessman ...
Following a Phase II investigation, the Serbian Competition Commission granted conditional clearance to SBB''s takeover of IKOM. This consolidation of leading cable operators in Belgrade represents a landmark case for the Serbian authority and is related to global trends in consolidation of cable network operators, which fosters the investments necessary for improvements to network infrastructure and competition with IPTV, OTT and satellite content providers ...
On July 7, 2022, the Cyberspace Administration of China (the “CAC”) formally promulgated the Measures for Security Assessment of Cross-border Data Transfers (the “Assessment Measures”), which specify and implement the provisions on data export in accordance with Article 37 of the Cybersecurity Law of the People’s Republic of China (the “CSL”), Article 31 of the Data Security Law of the People’s Republic of China (the “DSL”), and Article
Key Points Starting July 31, 2021, all employees who are not fully vaccinated shall be provided respirators for voluntary use. Exclusion pay is required even if an employee is not able to work. Employers should amend their COVID-19 Prevention Plans. Introduction On June 3, 2021, the Cal/OSHA Standards Board (Board) passed changes to the COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (ETS). Initially, the Board voted 4-3 against the proposed ETS ...
In a landmark victory for Federally-qualified health centers, a California Court of Appeal confirmed last October that federal and state law requires the State of California to pay FQHCs “100 percent” of their costs of furnishing core and other ambulatory services to Medi-Cal beneficiaries. (Tulare Pediatric Health Care Center v. State Department of Health Care Services (2nd Dist. 2019) 41 Cal.App.5th 163 ...
Last month, a California appellate court reversed the trial court and ruled that a subcontractor's insurer had a duty to defend an additional-insured general contractor in underlying construction-defect litigation. In McMillin Homes Construction, Inc. v. National Fire & Marine Insurance Company (2019) 35 Cal.App.5th 1042, a general contractor was an additional insured under a commercial general liability policy issued to its roofing subcontractor ...
Key Points In Martin v. California Coastal Commission, the Court of Appeal issued a rare opinion discussing local policies that are designed to manage and mitigate coastal bluff erosion. The court upheld a permit condition that required a new home to be set back 79 feet from the edge of a coastal bluff. The court reaffirmed that the policy at issue requires new development to be reasonably safe from failure and erosion over the entirety of the development’s lifetime ...
Employers in industries with fluctuating daily labor needs, such as retail services, often require employees to call in ahead of a scheduled shift to find out whether they are needed to work. According to a recently-published California Court of Appeal decision, employees who are required to use such a call-in procedure may be entitled to "reporting time pay" if they are told not to come to work that day—even if the employees do not physically report to work ...
Key Points The State Assembly and Senate have both passed AB 361 and AB 339, two bills aimed at addressing Brown Act teleconferencing requirements in the COVID-19 landscape. The Governor is expected to sign or veto the bills before October 1 ...
Article PDFJust when businesses thought they had figured out their Proposition 65 compliance strategies, the State of California, through the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), has proposed a substantial change that will drastically limit the use of the short-form safe harbor warning first authorized in 2018 ...
At its Voting Meeting today the Commission adopted a new standard offer contract available to any Qualifying Facility (QF) of 20 megawatts or less seeking to sell electricity to a Commission-jurisdictional utility pursuant to the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). Under PURPA, Commission-jurisdictional utilities must provide QFs the option of executing any existing PURPA contract for which they qualify ...
On August 3, 2020, the California Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision in Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc., clarifying the bounds of legitimate competition under California tort and antitrust law. The Court’s ruling generally came down in favor of encouraging competition, reducing claims for tortious interference with contract, and decreasing the risk of litigation arising from normal competitive activity ...
On December 22, 2016, in Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc., Case No. S224853, the California Supreme Court issued a split decision on rest periods. In a decision in which four justices concurred, and two concurred and dissented, in part, the Court held that employers “must relieve their employees of all duties and relinquish any control over how employees spend their break time ...
In Union of Medical Marijuana Patients v. City of San Diego, the California Supreme Court unanimously held that the City of San Diego failed to analyze the potential environmental impacts of its medical marijuana dispensary law. While the main issue in this case was the definition of a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the ruling has important ramifications for the legal cannabis market as a whole ...
California employers should assess their meal period policies and practices in light of the California Supreme Court's February 25, 2021, decision in Donohue v. AMN Services, LLC (Donohue). This ruling: (1) prohibits California employers from rounding time punches for meal periods and (2) holds that time records showing non-compliant meal periods will raise a rebuttable presumption of liability for meal period violations ...
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court issued an important decision for employers that rejects the application of the federal de minimis defense to unpaid wage claims arising under California law. In Troester v. Starbucks, Case No. S234969 (July 26, 2018), the Supreme Court held that California law prohibits requiring employees to "routinely work for minutes off the clock without compensation ...
On March 4, 2019, the California Supreme Court ruled in Cal Fire Local 2881 et. al. v. California Public Employees' Retirement System that public retirement system members do not have a vested right to purchase "airtime" – nonqualified service credit unrelated to public service ...
In the recent case of 'Ixchel Pharma v. Biogen', the Ninth Circuit asked the California Supreme Court to resolve two questions “because of their significance for business torts in California.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit—which includes California—occasionally encounters questions of California law that it cannot resolve ...
Key Points The California Supreme Court clarified the so-called California Rule on public employee’s "vested rights" to pension benefits, holding that detrimental financial changes to employee pension benefits do not invariably require that offsetting comparable new advantages be provided. And it set a legal framework for analyzing that issue ...
