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
Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Firm expands in London and Leeds with dual merger

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Private wealth and real estate firmpromotes two to partner and five to senior associate

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Agile firm expands employment team with two partner hires

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll