header-logo header-logo

07 July 2011 / Emma Davies
Issue: 7473 / Categories: Features , Health & safety , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Doctor, doctor

Emma Davies prescribes a regulatory health check

There has been a spate of recent announcements from the coalition government regarding reducing the regulatory burden on businesses, including  the Red Tape Challenge where once a fortnight, the government invites comments on regulations affecting a particular sector (manufacturing is next), in the hope of simplifying or even removing those posing the greatest burden.

Alongside this, there is an ongoing consultation on health and safety laws, and the “One-In-One-Out” policy requires the impact of any proposed regulation to be calculated, and before it can be introduced, requires the repeal of any equally costly existing regulation. This ensures that any new regulations are cost-neutral for businesses in terms of compliance. The caveat to this is that not every business is equally affected by every regulation—so the net effect for some businesses may be less neutral than for others.

But there are some areas where it is likely that regulation will always remain—principally where safety is concerned—and rather than reducing regulation in these areas, the government intends that these

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll