About us

Greene & Greene is a long established firm of solicitors based in Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk. Our lawyers advise individuals and businesses based all over the UK.

We regularly attract new clients who have been using firms in London, but now receive a more cost efficient and more personal service from us here in Bury St Edmunds.

agr (1) Agriculture & Farming (9) Arbitration (2) Articles (11) Bribery Act (1) Business (36) Business Law (2) Charity (1) Charity Fundraising (9) Children Issues (10) Cohabitation (11) Collaborative Law (4) Commercial (8) Commercial Property (12) Compromise Agreements (5) Consumer (3) Contracts (2) Copyright (1) Corporate and M&A (18) Corporate Finance (7) Debt Recovery (2) Defamation (1) Development Rights (1) Dispute Resolution (46) Disputed Wills (6) Divorce (12) Divorce and Separation (24) Education (1) Employment (39) Employment Advice (18) Employment Law (21) Employment Rights (12) Employment Tribunal (13) Environment Agency Prosecutions (2) Environmental Law (5) Expert Witnesses (1) Family Businesses (6) Family Law (31) Family Mediation (9) fFamily Mediation (1) Freedom Workshop (1) General (13) Health & Safety (2) Inheritance Tax (2) Insolvency & Bankruptcy (1) Insurance (3) Intellectual Property (4) Landlord & Tenant (7) Lasting Powers of Attorney (3) Lawyers (3) Legal Update (6) Letter of Claim (2) Marriage (10) Motoring (12) Pension (1) Personal Affairs (12) Personal Injury (9) Pre-nuptial Agreements (4) Professional Advisers (4) Professional Negligence (3) Profile (2) Property (17) Property Disputes (18) Redundancies (7) Renewable Energy (2) Residential Conveyancing (6) Scams (1) Selling (1) Selling Company (1) Seminar (2) Small Claims (1) SME (1) Social Media (2) Tax (3) Tax Planning (6) Terms and Conditions (2) Trusts (6) UKELA (1) Unfair Dismissal (5) Wills & Estates (12) Wind Farm (2) Workshop (2) wWills & Estates (1)



Monthly Archives


Subject Access Requests: an Employee’s Motive is Irrelevant

In her latest Blog, Angharad Ellis Owen talks about Subject Access Requests in relation to the Data Protection Act 1998.

Under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA) an individual has the right to ask what personal data is held about them and to ask for a copy of that data.  This is commonly known as a Subject Access Request (SAR).

A SAR must be made in writing and a data controller (e.g. an employer) is obliged to comply with the request promptly and within 40 days of receipt, if it has received the necessary information from the individual.  Where an employer has failed to comply with the SAR provisions, an individual can ask the Information Commissioner to intervene.

There has been a recent trend for employees, or former employees, to use SARs as a means of obtaining evidence from employers to pursue grievances, seeking documents that may assist in litigation or using the process as a means of making life difficult for employers in order to encourage a settlement.

The obligation on employers to comply with SARs can be onerous and time-consuming. An employer will have to search computerised and non-computerised records for personal data. With the increased use of electronic communication, the volume of personal data can be extensive.  Employers also have to take care to protect the personal data of other individuals who may be identified as part of the search.

Historically, the Courts have held that the main purpose of a SAR was to allow an individual to check how their data was being processed and whether it infringed their privacy.  However, the Court of Appeal has recently considered the motives behind SARs and how they interrelate with ongoing litigation.  The Court has confirmed, as a principle, that a SAR may still be valid even if it is made for the collateral purpose of assisting with litigation.  The Courts have recognised that there is a need for proportionality, but it will fall on an employer to demonstrate that the supply of the information would involve a disproportionate effort.


It is important for businesses and organisations to protect themselves with appropriate training and ensure that their IT and electronic communication policies are robust. It is also important to review, monitor and comply with the organisation’s Data Protection policy.

Useful link

The Information Commissioner has published a Code of Practice on dealing with subject access requests https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/.

If you have any questions regarding the Data Protection Act 1998 or any other employment law matters please contact Angharad Ellis Owen (aellisowen@greene-greene.com ~ 01284 717453).  For more information on the services offered by Greene & Greene Solicitors please visit www.greene-greene.com and follow on Twitter @GreeneGreeneLaw.


Land Registration – why delay?

Many readers may be surprised if they were to discover that some or all of their land and property is not registered at the Land Registry. But what exactly does that mean and why could it spell bad news?

Firstly, let’s have a look at some of the background to the system of land registration. Following a series of Registration of Title Orders the whole of England and Wales is now subject to compulsory land registration on certain trigger events such as the completion of a sale or mortgage. Compulsory registration was introduced in a piecemeal fashion across the country and in East Anglia the Orders came into effect on various dates, mostly during the 1970s and 1980s. However, much of Suffolk was not subject to compulsory registration until 1 December 1990.

In excess of 80% of the land in England and Wales is now registered but that still leaves large swathes of unregistered land. If land has not been subject to any disposal or mortgage since the locality became subject to compulsory registration, there is a strong possibility it will remain unregistered. This can be particularly common for farmland where the holding is often passed from generation to generation within a family or has been held in the name of a company or the farming partnership for several decades.

If your land is unregistered that means it is not registered at the Land Registry with a title number and title plan and you will need to be able to produce the original deeds as proof of your ownership. This can be easier said than done on many occasions. Historically, banks often held title deeds but following the disappearance of numerous branches and the merger of various institutions in recent years it can sometimes be difficult to trace the whereabouts of deeds packs. If not held by the bank, deeds may be stored by solicitors or at home but there is always the risk of them being mislaid or destroyed. The consequences of losing the original deeds to unregistered land can be serious, with dealings in the land becoming considerably more costly and time consuming as a consequence.

If your land is unregistered, you can make a voluntary application for First Registration at the Land Registry. Here are just some of the benefits of registration:

  • Registered land has state-backed security of title. 
  • The title register provides a record of ownership, so there is no longer a need to produce the historic title deeds as evidence. Duplicate copies of the title register and plan may be obtained from the Land Registry for a nominal fee which gives peace of mind and ends worry about losing deeds.
  • Costs on future dealings should be reduced because the conveyancing procedure is more straightforward and it can also help speed up transactions.
  • It becomes more difficult for anybody squatting on land to claim ownership by adverse possession.

The Land Registry also currently offers a reduced fee for voluntary First Registrations. Greene & Greene has extensive experience in preparing and submitting such applications for all types of property ranging from small plots or individual houses to entire farms.

At a time of great uncertainty, many of our more progressive farming clients are now taking measures to assess their assets and consider the opportunities available to them moving forward. In addition to the benefits stated above, having a registered title makes it easier to clearly identify the extent and value of your land and this can assist in all manner of circumstances whether preparing a schedule of landholding assets or a new Partnership Agreement.

If you require assistance on a possible First Registration or any proposed transaction please contact Tom Andrews (thomasandrews@greene-greene.com or direct on 01284 717407) For more information on the services offered by Greene & Greene Solicitors please visit www.greene-greene.com and follow on Twitter @GreeneGreeneLaw


Ilott v Mitson – Testamentary freedom back from the grave?

On 15th March 2017 the Supreme Court handed down a landmark Judgment in the well documented case of Ilott v The Blue Cross and Others (known as Ilott v Mitson).  This is the first case in which the Supreme Court has been tasked with considering the Inheritance (Provision for Family & Dependants) Act 1975 (“the 1975 Act”).  The 1975 Act allows certain categories of applicants, such as a surviving spouse or adult child, to challenge a Will on the basis that it fails to make reasonable financial provision.

Ilott concerned a claim by an independent adult daughter who had not been left anything in her Mother’s Will.  The Mother left her Estate entirely to three charities.  Her Estate was worth £486,000.

Astonishingly this case was first heard around 10 years ago.  The Supreme Court’s Judgment has been much anticipated in the hope of clarifying the law governing the circumstances when adult children may be able to successfully challenge a Will of their parents.

It is likely that the dust will need to settle further following this Judgment, however, a number of points at first glance appear to be of great interest in this fascinating area of the law.

Claims for applicants, other than surviving spouses or civil partners, are limited to “maintenance”.  The Supreme Court has attempted to further clarify the meaning of “maintenance” and said: “The concept of maintenance is no doubt broad, but the distinction made by the differing paragraphs of section 1(2) shows that it cannot extend to any or every thing which it would be desirable for the claimant to have.  It must import provision to meet the everyday expenses of living.”

Testamentary freedom, which is the ability for you to decide who you leave your Estate to on your death, is back (sort of).  The Supreme Court underlined the significance of a Will maker’s (Testator) wishes in deciding whether a Will should be varied with the result that beneficiaries lose out or see their “entitlement” reduced or redirected completely.

In relation to claims by adult children, the Supreme Court said that they must establish:

  • a need to be maintained (nothing new here);
  • the relevant relationship to qualify the claimant; and
  • that the testator had a moral obligation to look after the claimant (the resurrection of the, so called, “moral claim” requirement).

However, the Supreme Court said that long estrangements could be an example of where needs are not always enough to justify a claim under the Act.

What does this all mean?

It initially appears that claims by adult children are likely to be more difficult to succeed and the wishes of the Testator may now finally be given more weight in light of this decision.

If you have any questions regarding the contesting of wills, trusts or probate matters please contact Ben Fox (benjaminfox@greene-greene.com ~ 01284 717442).   For more information on the services offered by Greene & Greene Solicitors please visit www.greene-greene.com


Employment Tribunal Judgments Available Online

It’s been a long time coming, but the Employment Tribunal has finally been dragged into the modern age. The online database of Employment Tribunal Judgments in England, Wales and Scotland is now live.

In the past, access to Employment Tribunal Judgments was restricted to those willing to search the dusty records held in Bury St. Edmunds (for England and Wales) or Glasgow (for Scotland). The new online database provides free and instant access to Judgments. The change is likely to have a significant impact on whether grievances are pursued in the Employment Tribunal, and the way in which employers vet potential employees.

A selection of decisions from 2015, 2016 and 2017 are currently listed on the database, with all future Judgments to be added as soon as they are publicised. It is not yet known whether existing Judgments will be added. It is likely that the number of records involved may make the task almost administratively impossible.

Perhaps the most useful tool on the new database is the ability to carry out a free text search. This means that employers will be able to search for an individual by name. Likewise an employee or other organisation can search to see if the employer has been involved in previous Tribunal proceedings.

From an employee perspective this may be an incentive to attempt to settle the claim before issuing proceedings. Employees are unlikely to want prospective employers to know that they have issued proceedings against their previous employer. However, if that employee’s previous claim was for discrimination they will be protected from victimisation by the new employer. A rejection of the potential employee’s job application because of a previous discrimination claim would be unlawful. 

From an employer’s perspective the publication could affect their reputation. It is also possible that confidential or commercially sensitive information mentioned in evidence is referred to in the Judgment and made readily available online. This in turn may impact the employer’s recruitment and retention of staff. It also remains to be seen whether existing employees use the information to further their own grievances/claims against the employers, particularly in relation to discrimination claims.

It will be interesting to see whether this new initiative will encourage the parties to settle claims earlier to avoid their name appearing on the database.

If you have any questions regarding employment law matters please contact Angharad Ellis Owen (aellisowen@greene-greene.com ~ 01284 717453) or Greg Jones (gregjones@greene-greene.com ~ 01284 717446).   For more information on the services offered by Greene & Greene Solicitors please visit http://www.greene-greene.com and follow on Twitter @GreeneGreeneLaw.


Free Residential Property Law Update


Join our expert lawyers, Jonathan Mathers (Agriculture & Residential Property), Ansa Khan (Residential Property) and Natalie Stoter (Private Client & Taxation) on Thursday 16th March at Denny Bros Conference Suite, Bury St. Edmunds for this informative seminar updating you on the latest property law issues.

Areas to be covered include:

  • A review of the last 12 months;
  • Property Fraud;
  • Incoming energy efficiency rules;
  • Issues for buy-to-let investors;
  • Stamp duty exemptions & reliefs; and
  • Looking forward to 2017/18.

You will also have the opportunity to ask questions of the speakers on any property law issues that may be of specific interest to you.

Denny Bros Conference Suite, Kempson Way, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, IP32 7AR

8.30am                Registration & Continental Breakfast

9.00am                Seminar followed by Q & A session

10.30am              Refreshments & Close

To book your free place(s) at the seminar please email joolswindermere@greene-greene.com.

Please contact us if you are unable to attend this seminar but would be interested in joining us on an alternative date or running an in-house property update for your leadership team.

For more information on the services offered by Greene & Greene Solicitors please visit www.greene-greene.com and follow on Twitter @GreeneGreeneLaw.


New compensation limits in force from 6 April 2017

The Employment Rights (Increase of Limits) Order 2017 has recently been laid before Parliament and will increase the compensation limits and minimum awards that are payable under employment legislation from 6 April 2017.  

Notable changes include:

  • an increase to the limit on compensation for unfair dismissal from £78,962.00 to £80,541.00
  • the limit on a week’s pay for the purposes of calculating, among other things, statutory redundancy payments and the basic award for unfair dismissal, will increase from £479.00 to £489.00      
  • guarantee pay during lay off or short-time working will increase from £26.00 to £27.00 per day
  • the minimum basic award will increase from £5,853.00 to £5,970.00 in cases where a dismissal is unfair because the reason (or principal reason) for the dismissal is connected to: health and safety matters, acting as an employee representative, being a trade union representative, or performing functions as a trustee to the occupational pension scheme.

The basic award compensates employees for loss of job security and is calculated using the same formula as the statutory redundancy payment which is based on the employee’s age, length of service and weekly pay (subject to the above statutory limit).

The new rates take effect where the ‘appropriate date’ for the cause of action (such as the date of termination in an unfair dismissal claim) falls on or after 6 April 2017. Where the appropriate date falls before 6 April, the old limits will still apply, irrespective of the date on which compensation is awarded.

If you have any questions regarding the new compensation limits or any other employment law matters please contact Greg Jones (gregjones@greene-greene.com ~ 01284 717446) or Angharad Ellis Owen (aellisowen@greene-greene.com ~ 01284 717453).   For more information on the services offered by Greene & Greene Solicitors please visit www.greene-greene.com and follow on Twitter @GreeneGreeneLaw.

Page 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 38 Next 6 Entries »