The High Court decision in McDaniel v Talbot & Anor [2026] EWHC 928 (Ch), handed down on 17 April 2026, shows that being left out of a Will does not always mean you have no claim.

In the case, Emma McDaniel brought a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 after her father died leaving his estate to his widow under a 2014 Will which specifically excluded her. The Will said: “I DECLARE that I have NOT made any provision in my Will for my son Rhys Winstone whom I have never met nor my daughter Emma Winstone who I last saw about twenty years ago. I do not have contact with either of them.”

Although father and daughter had been estranged for many years, they reconnected in 2019 and developed a close relationship before his death. The court took into account Emma’s financial difficulties, her caring responsibilities, and the changed family circumstances.  The court held that the Will failed to make reasonable financial provision for Emma’s maintenance and made an award for her over £123,000 from the estate.  The claimant was held by the Court to have an income that was just at a subsistence level so that justified her financial need but was not (of itself) the triggering threshold for a payment from the Deceased’s estate. There had to be something else, ie special circumstances rather than mere financial vulnerability.

You may have a claim if  you are a child of the person who died, or someone they were supporting financially and:

• You were left out of a Will, or received far less than expected
• You are struggling financially or have significant caring responsibilities
• The relationship had changed since the Will was written
• The Will no longer reflects what was really happening at the time of death

Every case depends on its own facts, but this decision shows that courts do not just look at the wording of a Will. They also consider needs, family circumstances, and whether there is a fair basis for making provision.

If you believe you have been unfairly left out of a Will, it is important to get advice promptly, as strict time limits can apply to inheritance claims. A clear review of your circumstances can help you understand whether you may be able to bring a claim.  We can provide this so please contact us – [email protected]

The employment tribunal system has been under increasing pressure for some time, with long delays leaving both employers and employees waiting a long time for claims to be resolved. Cases are taking more than double the amount of time to be concluded via the Employment Tribunal than a year ago.  As at December 2025 there were 30,784 open cases.  This is only likely to increase further with the changes brought about by the Employment Rights Act 2025.  The reason for the backlog is that there are more new cases coming through quicker than the employment tribunal system can deal with the cases it already has!

There have been some recent proposals supported by the Employment Lawyers Association.  The suggested reforms include compulsory mediation for all claims and the introduction of a three-track tribunal structure based on the value and complexity of the dispute. The aim is to deal with straightforward claims more efficiently, encourage earlier settlement where possible, and allow more complex matters to be managed with procedures better matched to their scale.

The proposals would divide tribunal claims into three categories: simpler claims under £20,000, mid-range claims managed more tightly with limits on issues, and higher-value or more complex claims handled with a more in-depth procedure and potential costs consequences.

For employers, prolonged tribunal proceedings can mean extended management time, legal cost and uncertainty. For employees, delay can mean prolonged stress and uncertainty at a time when they may already be dealing with the loss of employment or a breakdown in workplace relations.

However, these are currently only proposals. Even so, the debate highlights an important point that employment disputes are becoming more complex, and both businesses and individuals benefit from taking early advice, understanding the strengths of a case, and exploring settlement wherever appropriate.

How can we help?

If you are dealing with an employment dispute, whether as an employer or an employee, obtaining clear legal advice at an early stage can make a real difference. If you would like practical guidance and legal advice to resolve the claim then our team are here to help you take the right steps with confidence.

The Employment Rights Act 2025 (Commencement No. 4 and Transitional and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2026 (SI 2026/559) have been made, bringing into force sections of the ERA 2025 dealing with unfair dismissal changes on 1 January 2027.

Major changes to the law on unfair dismissal are on the way, and employers should start preparing now. From 1 January 2027, employees will gain protection much earlier in their employment and, in some cases, compensation exposure could increase significantly. For businesses, this is the right time to review contracts, policies, probation processes and dismissal procedures.

What is changing?

• The qualifying period for most ordinary unfair dismissal claims will reduce from two years to six months.
• The statutory cap on compensatory awards for unfair dismissal will be removed.
• The right to request written reasons for dismissal will also arise earlier.
• These reforms are expected to increase risk for employers who rely on informal processes during the early months of employment.

When do the changes take effect?

The key unfair dismissal reforms are due to take effect on 1 January 2027. Importantly, they will apply based on the employee’s effective date of termination. That means businesses should not assume current rules will continue to protect decisions made close to the changeover date. Employers should plan ahead well before the end of 2026.

Why this matters for employers

These changes mean that fair process, proper documentation and timely performance management will matter much earlier in the employment relationship. Employers should be reviewing probation periods, manager training, dismissal procedures and internal policies now to reduce the risk of claims later.

Our employment law team advises businesses on managing workplace risk, updating contracts and policies, and handling dismissals fairly and effectively. If you would like advice on how these upcoming reforms could affect your organisation, we are here to help.

Need support preparing for the 2027 changes? Please get in touch with our employment law team for practical, tailored advice.

When selling a property, it’s easy to assume that once contracts are exchanged, responsibility begins to shift to the buyer. However, one critical obligation remains firmly with the seller: maintaining buildings insurance right up to the day of completion.

Failing to do so can expose both parties to serious financial and legal risks.

The Key Difference: Exchange vs Completion

In a property transaction, two important milestones often get confused:

• Exchange of contracts – when the agreement becomes legally binding
• Completion – when ownership officially transfers to the buyer

Between these two points, there is a period—sometimes days, sometimes weeks—where the seller is still the legal owner of the property.

You Still Own the Property

Until completion takes place, you remain the legal proprietor. This means the property is still legally yours, along with all the responsibilities that come with it.

If the property suffers damage during this period—such as fire, flood, or structural issues—you are still accountable.

What Happens If You Cancel Insurance Too Early?

Letting your insurance lapse before completion can lead to serious consequences:

1. Financial Loss
   If the property is damaged or destroyed before completion and you are uninsured, you could face significant repair or reinstatement costs out of your own pocket.
2. Breach of Contract
   Most sale contracts require the seller to transfer the property in the condition it was in at exchange (allowing for fair wear and tear). If damage occurs and you cannot rectify it, you may be in breach of contract.
3. Breach of your Mortgage terms
   Where a mortgage is secured against the property, failure to insure the property whilst you remain a legal proprietor would be a breach of your mortgage terms.

But Doesn’t the Buyer Have Insurance Too?

In many cases, buyers are advised to arrange buildings insurance from exchange. However, this does not remove the seller’s responsibility.  Equally, where buyers insure the property, the assumptions upon which the insurance is offered may not be correct thus invalidating the insurance.

There can be overlap, but the key point is this:  until completion, the risk ultimately remains with the seller as the legal owner, unless explicitly agreed otherwise in the contract.

How We Support Sellers

We regularly advise clients on their responsibilities during the sale process, ensuring that nothing is overlooked in the critical period between exchange and completion. Our aim is to protect your position and help your transaction proceed without unnecessary risk or delay.

Final Thought

Cancelling your insurance early might seem like a small administrative step—but it can have major consequences. Maintaining cover until completion is a simple yet vital safeguard that protects your property, your finances, and your sale.

If you’re unsure about your obligations as a seller or need guidance during your transaction, we’re here to help.

From 6^th April 2026 – Section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA 2025) amends the definition of qualifying disclosure in section 43B of the ERA 1996 to include a disclosure that the worker reasonably believes tends to show that sexual harassment “has occurred, is occurring or is likely to occur”. Sexual harassment is defined by reference to section 26(2) of the Equality Act 2010

It is arguable that harassment was already covered within the meaning of a “[failure] to comply with any legal obligation”, or in some cases as a danger to health and safety or a criminal offence, but this puts the matter beyond doubt. The amendment only applies to sexual harassment, and so disclosures relating to other forms of harassment must still fall within one of the other categories of disclosure in order to be covered..)

It is still necessary to demonstrate that the worker reasonably believes that the disclosure is made in the public interest to amount to whistleblowing.

What is whistleblowing?

Whistleblowing occurs where an individual raises concerns about wrongdoing in the workplace in the public interest.  A “protected disclosure” as the legislation names it, typically relates to issues such as criminal offences, breaches of legal obligations, health and safety risks, environmental damage, or attempts to conceal wrongdoing. The key feature is that the disclosure must be made with a reasonable belief that it is in the public interest, rather than purely a personal grievance.  Now disclosures of a sexual harassment nature have been added.

Individuals who make a protected disclosure are afforded protection as long as they are amongst the group of those entitled to protection, including employees, workers, and some contractors. They must not suffer dismissal, victimisation, or any form of detriment because they have spoken up. In cases where whistleblowers are dismissed, they may bring claims for automatic unfair dismissal, and compensation in whistleblowing cases is not subject to the usual statutory cap. These protections are designed to encourage individuals to raise concerns safely and to ensure organisations remain accountable.

The importance of understanding whistleblowing rights, protections and obligations continues to grow for both employees and employers.

What this means for employees

If you are considering raising a concern at work, it is important to understand your rights. You may be protected if your disclosure satisfies the legal definition of whistleblowing

Employees often worry about:

• Whether their disclosure is legally protected
• How to raise concerns safely and appropriately
• The risk of victimisation or dismissal

Getting early legal advice can help you make informed decisions, ensure that your concerns are raised in the correct way, and protect your position if issues arise.

What this means for employers

For employers, the risks of getting whistleblowing wrong can be significant—both financially and reputationally. Employment tribunal claims for whistleblowing detriment or dismissal are uncapped and can result in substantial awards.

Key steps employers should be taking include:

• Reviewing and updating whistleblowing policies
• Training managers on how to handle disclosures
• Ensuring clear, confidential reporting channels
• Conducting thorough and impartial investigations
• Taking steps to prevent retaliation against whistleblowers

How our Employment Law Team can help

Our experienced employment law team advises both employees and employers on all aspects of whistleblowing, including:

For employees:

• Assessing whether your disclosure is protected
• Supporting you through internal processes and investigations
• Bringing claims for whistleblowing detriment or unfair dismissal

For employers:

• Drafting and reviewing whistleblowing policies and procedures
• Advising on handling disclosures and conducting investigations
• Defending tribunal claims and managing reputational risk

Get in touch

Whistleblowing issues can be complex and sensitive. Whether you are raising a concern or responding to one, early legal advice is key.

If you would like to discuss how these developments affect you or your organisation, our employment law team is here to help