Advertise

The Future Lawyer Weekly Update – w/c 2nd October 2017

The Future Lawyer Weekly Update – w/c 2nd October 2017

Commercial Awareness: Your round-up of the stories that you should discuss at interview this week.

Real Estate

Young people say “yes in my back yard!”

Reported by Anna Flaherty

A movement has started in San Francisco, where young people are protesting against the lack of housing. Current house owners are objecting builds, for reasons such as the fact that developments would block the light to property owner’s vegetable patches. In response to this, young people are lobbying due to the lack of housing that is available to them at a reasonable price. Many people have to live far out of the city in able to afford accommodation.

Alternative and cheaper means of living, such as short-term rentals with Airbnb, have been restricted in San Francisco and New York. This has been done due to its effect on the hotel industry in these cities. However, though Airbnb may be cheaper, resident rights are vague as it may be unclear whether you have a lease or a licence. This adds to the struggle that millennials face in finding cheap and secure living arrangements.

This seems to be a resounding issue amongst millennials, not just in the US, but also here in the UK. The recent manifesto by the labour party was greeted by many, in the hope that it would deliver lower housing costs for the next generation. This hope comes from the disappointment that Tory capitalism has brought in its failure to improve many people’s standard of living, with UK incomes still struggling to make ends meet. This is one of the contributing factors as to why Corbyn won so much support from younger voters.

Read more from The Guardian here and here.

Careers

Allen & Overy NQ pay tops £80,000

Reported by Nathan Gore

Allen & Overy has recently increased pay for its newly qualified solicitors, to an eye-watering £80,000. In doing so, it becomes the third magic circle firm to offer more than £80,000, up from £78,500, a 3% rise. The next fresh batch of NQs will be earning more than at Linklaters (£78,500) and Slaughter and May (£78,000), but slightly behind Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, which pays its NQs £85,000. Clifford Chance, who also recently increased their NQ pay, top the charts at £87,300.

The recent dramatic rise in NQ pay comes as the traditional elite firms in the UK are facing stern competition from their US counterparts, with some US firms being able to offer NQ salaries in excess of £100,000. Under A&O’s new pay scheme, first year trainees will earn £44,000, up from from £42,000 (4.7%) while second year trainees will see pay increased from £47,000 to £49,000.

As a result of this rise, A&O can now offer trainees more money than fellow firms Freshfields, Slaughter and May and Linklaters. Those firms pay £43,000 in the first year. For a second year trainee, Freshfields and Slaughter and May pay £48,000, while Linklaters pays £49,000. They still lag behind Clifford Chance, however, with that particular firm paying their first-year trainees £44,000, rising to £50,500 in the second year.

What’s more, these are just the starting salaries for NQs, with the full figure likely to be higher when performance-related bonuses are included.

Read more in The Law Society Gazette

Real Estate

NHS to face court over patient kept alive by blood transfusions

Reported by Jutha Cheewat

A mother of a patient who is being cared for in a London hospital has taken the NHS to court. The patient in question is in her thirties and has been continuously receiving blood transfusions to boost her haemoglobin levels.

While her medical team could not agree on a diagnosis, some suggested she is suffering from a personality disorder and anorexia, but was not given the additional psychiatric care she requested.

The monthly transfusions have caused the patient to be more distressed, and is at risk of losing her life as a consequence. Thus, her mother wanted the court to decide whether continuing such treatment is in her daughter’s best interests.

This is one of the more complex and unusual medical cases presented, as the patient was detained under the Mental Health Act but was not currently being treated for any of her mental conditions. The inconclusive diagnosis is making it harder for the judge to decide what best for this patient.

The case also begs the question of liability as the local NHS was represented in the court, but not the NHS England, the body who should ultimately be responsible for dealing with such a complex medical case.

Read more in The Guardian.

 

Get these updates straight to your inbox every week by signing up here or if you are an existing member, ensure you receive these emails by changing your preferences here.

Exclusive email insights, members-only careers events, insider tips and more.