header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
21 May 2010 / Suzanne Mckie , Anna Thomas
Issue: 7418 / Categories: Features , Family , Employment
printer mail-detail

Winning hearts & minds?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Anna Thomas & Suzanne McKie analyse the potential effects of the additional paternity leave regulations

Within the raft of legislation brought into force on 6 April, one provision stands out. The Additional Paternity Leave Regulations 2010 (APLR) confer a new right for employee fathers of children born on or after 3 April 2011 to take additional paternity leave of up to 26 weeks.

The APLR implement a power in the Work and Families Act 2006 incorporated by that Act into the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) which governs entitlement to additional paternity leave.By the Additional Statutory Paternity Pay (Weekly Rates) Regulations 2010 (ASLR) the leave may be paid if it is taken during the mother’s maternity pay or allowance pay period. Additional paternity leave and pay will also be available to adopters where there is an entitlement to statutory adoption leave and pay.

Like the Flexible Working Regulations, the APLR are part of a wider policy objective to enable fathers to play a more significant role in bringing up

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll