Each state`s reporting obligations identify specific individuals who are required to inform authorities of alleged abuses. Although it varies from state to state, mandated rapporteurs are usually people who meet children through their professional abilities. In Pennsylvania, the law requires everyone who faces abuse because of their job skills to report it. More commonly, a state law refers to a number of specific professions.29 Common occupations include: physical and mental health care providers, teachers, child care providers, legal professionals (e.g. judges, judges, lawyers, law enforcement officers), clergy, and government officials who care for children and families.30 In addition, some states designate anyone who cares for or deals with children as a mandatory reporter (e.g., Alabama, Missouri, Montana). In 18 states, anyone suspected that a child has been abused must notify the appropriate authorities.31 This report is intended to provide useful information to federal and federal policymakers interested in how state laws deal with legal rape. It is also intended to serve as a resource for HHS fellows to better understand their legal obligations regarding legal rape. As shown in the first column of Table 1, the age of consent varies from state to state. In most states (34), he is 16 years old.

In other countries, the age of consent is 17 or 18 (6 and 11 states respectively). In terms of criminal penalties for violations of the Age of Consent Act, Idaho distinguishes between men and women. It is one of the few states that makes a distinction on the basis of gender. Oberman notes that the rise of feminism has greatly influenced changes to legal rape laws. The laws remained largely unchanged until the late 19th century, when feminists sought to raise the age of consent to protect young women from potentially forced relationships. As a result of these efforts, the average age of consent has increased from 12 to 18. Minimum age. In 27 states that do not have a uniform age of consent, laws set the age at which a person cannot have legal sex, regardless of the age of the accused (see second column of table 1). The minimum age in these states ranges from 10 to 16 years.

The legality of sexual intercourse with a person over the minimum age and under the age of consent depends on the age difference between the two parties and/or the age of the defendant. 22 Most laws classify crimes according to the gravity of the crime (e.g., 1st, 2nd, or 3rd degree rape). State summaries identify cases where the gravity of a particular crime varies according to the age of the accused. For example, Georgian law considers the crime of legal rape to be a crime, unless the victim is 14 or 15 years old (the age of consent is 16) and the accused is not older than the victim, in which case the crime is only a misdemeanor. Unlike most rape laws, where violence is a key element of the crime, legal rape laws assume that any sexual activity with people under a certain age constitutes coercion, even if both parties believe their participation is voluntary. In general, legal rape laws define the age at which a person is legally incapable of consenting to sexual activity. For example, the Idaho Supreme Court has defined the ability to give legal consent, including: (1) the ability to recognize the potential consequences of sexual intercourse and, given that understanding, (2) the ability to make a conscious choice. [4] Most often, however, all acts will be illegal (with the same age requirements), but the severity of the penalty will vary depending on the type of sexual activity.

In Kentucky, for example, sexual activity with children under the age of 12 is illegal, regardless of the age of the accused. If the activities involve sexual contact, the accused is guilty of first-degree sexual assault (Class D felony); if it is sexual intercourse, the accused is guilty of first-degree rape (a Class A felony). To legally have sex in Idaho, both partners must be over the age of consent. Curiously, both commit a crime and are victims at the same time if both people are under the age of consent and have sex with each other. 10 In some cases, a state`s laws on sexual intercourse do not coincide with one or more of its laws on other types of sexual acts. For example, in South Dakota, sexual penetration with a person between the ages of 10 and 16 is illegal unless the defendant is less than 3 years older than the victim. However, sexual interference with a person under the age of 16 is unlawful regardless of the age of the defendant (in State v. Darby, 556 N.W.2d 311, 127 (SD 1996), the South Dakota Supreme Court held that these two offences could be mutually exclusive). These cases are identified in the corresponding situation summaries. The laws of each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia were the primary sources of information for this report. Each state`s laws were accessible via the internet – usually through the state legislature`s website. At the time of writing, all laws were in force until at least 2003.

This report is not a legal document. It shall be based on the most recent information available; However, many of the state laws mentioned were not commented. However, every effort has been made to seek additional resources to learn about recent changes in applicable law or jurisprudence and prosecutors` general views on legislation. In Washington, the age of consent is 16, and for victims as young as 14 or 15, child rape laws apply if the perpetrator is at least four years older than the victim. 17 Under the offence of “debauchery of a minor”, it is unlawful to denigrate or corrupt morality by obscenely deceiving a person under the age of 17 into knowing another person in a carnal manner. In Idaho, the age of consent to sexual acts is 18. Simply put, people usually have to be over the age of 18 before they can legally engage in sexual behavior. Legal requirements for reporting rape are usually found in the sections of state codes dealing with minors, children and families, family relationships, or social services, while the penal or penal code deals with the legality of certain crimes. This section of the report summarizes States` obligations to report child abuse and the extent to which they address the issue of legal rape. It is divided into four subsections. Understanding the different terms used in a state law is especially important in states where a person may be legally able to consent to one type of sexual activity but not another. For example, Alabama`s laws regarding the legality of sexual activity with people under the age of 16 and over the age of 12 differ depending on the type of activity.

In cases involving sexual intercourse, defendants over the age of 16 who are at least 2 years older than the victim are guilty of second-degree rape. However, sexual touching is only illegal in cases where the accused is at least 19 years of age. Sexual assault is any type of sexual activity to which you have not consented. Assault is the unlawful touching of another person against their will. A person convicted of sexual assault or sexual assault can be sentenced to up to 20 years in prison, depending on the seriousness of the crime. This section summarizes some important provisions of state rape law.9 Subsection 1 examines the legality of sexual activity with minors (e.g., age of consent). Subsection 2 briefly describes the variety of crimes described in state laws. 11 Sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 16 is legal in certain circumstances. However, sexual interference with anyone under the age of 15 is illegal, regardless of the age of the accused.

In States where the definition of child abuse does not explicitly refer to legal rape, discrepancies between the legality of certain sexual activities and whether they are reportable crimes are more frequent. Consider the following examples: 13 Sexual intercourse with a woman under the age of 18 is illegal, regardless of the age of the accused. However, sexual acts that do not constitute penetration are legal in certain circumstances if the victim is at least 16 years old. State rape offenses describe the age at which a person can legally consent to sexual activity. This section focuses on laws related to sexual relations.10Table 1 summarizes the following values, if any: Age difference.

A group of prominent female legislators announced the proposal in December 2021, in response to the Supreme Court, which heard arguments about a Mississippi bill banning abortions after 15 weeks. The judges` questions indicated that they were prepared to uphold Mississippi`s law, thereby weakening Roe v. Wade. In 2017, about 80 percent of Colorado counties did not have clinics offering abortions, and 27 percent of Colorado women lived in those counties. [1] What if the patient is 17 years old when she makes the abortion appointment, but is 18 years old on the day of the abortion appointment? Parental consent means that a parent or guardian must approve an abortion before it takes place on the minor in their care. Informing parents does not give parents a say in their child`s decision to have an abortion. A parental notification requirement means that the doctor must send written notification to the minor`s legal guardians before performing the abortion. Between 1972 and 1974, no deaths from illegal abortion were recorded in the state. [49] In the winter of 1978, three women had to be hospitalized in Denver less than a month after consuming royal penny oil to induce an abortion. One of these women died.

[13] Several hundred anti-abortion activists participate in the Rocky Mountain March for Life in Colorado each year to support abortion. [51] • In 2017, there were 1,587 facilities offering abortions in the United States, down 5% from 1,671 facilities in 2014. Sixteen percent of facilities in 2017 were abortion clinics (i.e. clinics where more than half of all patient visits were for abortion), 35% were non-specialized clinics, 33% were hospitals, and 16% were private doctors` offices. Sixty percent of all abortions were performed in abortion clinics, 35 percent in non-specialized clinics, 3 percent in hospitals, and 1 percent in doctors` offices. [1] In Colorado, you do not need parental permission to have an abortion. However, state law requires your doctor to notify your parents or guardians 48 hours before your abortion appointment, based on Colorado`s Parental Notification Act of 2003. Since 2010, however, the abortion landscape in the United States has become increasingly restrictive as more states pass anti-abortion laws. Between January 1, 2011 and July 1, 2019, states passed 483 new abortion restrictions, accounting for nearly 40 percent of all abortion restrictions passed by states in the decades following Roe v. Wade. Some of the most common restrictions on abortion at the state level include notification or consent requirements for minors, restrictions on public funding, mandatory counseling designed to discourage individuals from having abortions, prescribed waiting periods before an abortion, and unnecessary and burdensome regulations for abortion facilities.

This would likely lead residents seeking abortions to travel to Colorado if they can afford it. Providers here are preparing for Texas residents to visit clinics for care after the state strictly banned abortion for six weeks last fall. Today, abortion laws are constantly changing. If they apply to you, it`s important to stay up to date on the laws in your area and how they affect you. You also need to understand a big difference in abortion notification laws – parental consent vs parental notification. During the 2022 legislature, Colorado Republicans proposed several bills aimed at restricting or even criminalizing abortion in the state. The bills were ultimately blocked by Democrats, who have a majority in the state legislature. [2] 2. Fuentes L and Jerman J, Distance travelled to obtain clinical abortion care in the United States and reasons for choosing clinic, Journal of Women`s Health, 2019, doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2018.7496.

How does parental notification work? If the minor patient is under 18 years of age and wishes to make an appointment for an abortion, the written notification must be sent to the address of the minor`s parents 48 hours before the scheduled abortion procedure. The minor patient may have the abortion performed 48 hours after written notification. The clock for 48 hours begins to tick at noon after the written notification. The Colorado Parental Notification Law, also cited and known as the Colorado Parental Notification Act, was passed by the Colorado legislature in 2003. The law requires doctors or health care providers to inform a parent or guardian of a minor`s planned abortion. There are exceptions to the notification rule, such as the formal emancipation of a minor or the minor has been subject to judicial circumvention of the obligation of parental notification. This law applies to anyone under the age of 18 who wishes to have an abortion, except in certain circumstances. If you are 17 years old and planning an abortion but you are 18 years old at the time of the appointment, the law does not apply. Certain extenuating circumstances allow minors to circumvent this law, such as: Every year, a wide range of people in the United States have abortions. In 2017, 862,320 abortions were performed in clinical settings in the United States. • In 2017, there were 32 facilities in Colorado that performed abortions, and 18 of those were clinics. These figures represent a 14% decrease in clinics compared to 2014, when there were a total of 36 abortion centers, including 21 clinics.

[1] Prior to the Reproductive Health Equity Act, Colorado`s law said little about abortion. A minor must notify at least one parent when receiving the procedure. And public health insurance can`t pay for an abortion unless a patient`s life is in danger. Otherwise, there are no waiting times or restrictions. Colorado has long been one of the few states to allow the procedure at any time during pregnancy. The law prohibits any person from intentionally or recklessly performing or attempting an abortion on a person if the gestational age of the fetus is 22 weeks or more, except in certain circumstances. Any person who performs or attempts to perform an abortion in violation of this article is guilty of a Class 1 offence, but may only be punished by a fine and not imprisonment. Parental consent laws for abortions can be confusing, especially since they vary from state to state.

Colorado is one of the safest states for people who have abortions, which is why we established Mile High Women`s Clinic in Denver. We follow Colorado government guidelines when minors are involved. The passage of the law in April means abortion rights are officially enshrined in state law and would have to be repealed by the state legislature, though this is unlikely because Colorado voters have repeatedly voted to defend abortion rights. Abortion will remain legal in Colorado. In 2022, Colorado enacted legal protection for abortion as a fundamental right. Colorado`s Amendment 48 was an initiative in 2008 to change the definition of a person to “any human being from the moment of fertilization.” On 4 November 2008, the initiative was rejected by 73.2% of voters. [31] Colorado`s Proposition 115 was a 2020 election initiative that prevented abortions at 22 weeks unless the pregnancy endangered the mother`s life. Performing an abortion after 22 weeks would have become a Class 1 offence. On November 3, 2020, Colorado voters rejected the proposal 115, with 59% of voters opposing the initiative. [32] On November 3, 2020, voters rejected a voting initiative that would have banned abortion after 22 weeks of PMT. [6] Stop Late Abortions in Colorado, CO SEC`Y OF STATE A woman who has an abortion is not subject to criminal penalties.

We`d love to hear from you! Let us know if you have used our advice and information to find out about your rights at work, or because you have had problems at work and what the outcome has been. Hi Dad! The Family and Medical Leave Act also applies to you. If you have worked in your current business for at least one year, you are entitled to a maximum of 12 weeks of unpaid maternity leave under this federal law. Ask someone in your HR department for details! To learn more about planning your maternity leave and the laws that protect you, see Manage your maternity leave. FMLA and CFRA are not limited to maternity leave. There are several other reasons why someone may take FMLA or CFRA. To learn more, click here. There may be the same waiting period before maternity insurance comes into effect as there is to cover other health problems. Please note that all consultation lines are closed on public holidays. In general, employees cannot lose their job if they take leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Again, employers cannot reprimand employees who take FMLA leave, and employers cannot interfere with the employee`s FMLA-protected rights.

Employers cannot use FMLA leave as a detrimental factor in future job evaluations, such as promotions or salary increases. These laws apply only to employers. It is the responsibility of the employer or union to take out insurance policies that comply with the law. There is no comparable obligation for insurance undertakings. However, an insurance company would be desirable to inform an employer or union client of the legal obligations regarding maternity benefits. Any health insurance offered in the course of employment must cover maternity in the same way as other conditions, whether or not the employer contributes to the plan. An employer who does not have disability insurance for employees is not required to provide such maternity coverage, but must treat the pregnant employee in the same way as other temporarily disabled workers. Unfortunately, there is still discrimination against pregnant workers. If you don`t know the law, it`s certainly possible that you`re missing out on rights that legally belong to you. The two most notable laws protecting pregnant women are the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act. Many employers offer paid leave to their employees even if the person takes FMLA leave, while other employers have a separate maternity and/or paternity leave program. Still others allow a person to use sick leave or annual leave to cover days away from work.

As part of maternity leave (PDL), there are important safeguards for pregnant employees. Essentially, it is illegal to discriminate against or avenge an employee because of pregnancy. Harassment and unlawful dismissal of a pregnant employee is also illegal. If an employee becomes pregnant, she has the right to take maternity leave. A doctor or other health care provider ultimately decides if an employee is disabled by pregnancy. What if you have a difficult pregnancy and have to take all your “maternity leave” before giving birth because your doctor put you to bed? What if your pregnancy bothers you? In this case, read our section on maternity leave. The Maternity Action advisory line does not receive any state support. It is funded entirely by donations and we are always working for funding to increase our capacity for consultation. If you would like to support our work, please donate via our JustGiving page.

If an employer does not offer coverage for dependents, it is not required to start such coverage. However, any group health insurance that provides coverage for dependent children and maternity protection for individuals must provide maternity protection for dependent children. The Wisconsin Insurance Commission`s rules require that pregnancy complications be covered in all health insurance plans. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act, passed in 1978, grants pregnant women the same rights as other people with “health problems” by prohibiting discrimination in the workplace. This law, which applies to companies with 15 or more employees, stipulates that the maternity rights advice line is managed by a team of advisers. We offer a free, independent and confidential consultation service for anyone who contacts us. For more information, see our Service Standards. Our e-mail advice service is provided via our online contact form. To learn more about maternity leave, visit our maternity leave page. Most people are happy for you when they find out you`re pregnant. Unfortunately, we have seen the bad side of bosses when they find out.

Some are determined to get rid of you. Many people want to know their rights, but often the law is too complicated to be able to discover for themselves. If you`ve just found out you`re pregnant and want to know how to handle it at work, call our lawyers today. While we can`t promise to give you advice on how to handle your situation, we`re happy to advise you for free and hear your story. We are always looking for case studies for media coverage or for our campaigns for better rights. Please send us your story. No personally identifiable information will be used unless we obtain your permission to publish your case. To share your story or feedback, please email us at info@maternityaction.org.uk. You may be entitled to various reasonable damages and precautions for these actions. In addition, the parent who does not give birth to the child also has the right to take leave to care for his or her sponsoring spouse. They may have a case of discrimination and/or FMLA if they are fired or treated differently for it.

Federal and state laws address the issue of maternity benefits. The pregnancy amendments to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are federal statutes. The Wisconsin Fair Employment Act (111.31-111.395, Wis.Stats.) contains the following wording regarding maternity: All 12 weeks of maternity leave can be taken at the same time or spread throughout the year before or after your baby is born. If you believe your leave has been unduly hindered, restricted, altered or denied, or if you are fired, fired or discriminated against because you resisted an illegal practice, you may have a valid legal claim against your employer. Please consider making a donation to support our work and help us help more women who really need guidance. Labour and pregnancy laws were drafted in response to a strong need for equity. When applying for maternity leave, don`t ask for anything you are not entitled to. So don`t hesitate to take advantage of the laws that women before you have fought long and hard to enforce.

We advise employees who have experienced pregnancy-related discrimination in the workplace. If our research shows that many mothers have similar complaints about their treatment at a particular company, our lawyers will consider the possibility of a class action lawsuit. We represent women throughout California in workplace litigation under federal and state law. If you are pregnant, what are your rights at work? How much maternity leave, if any, are you entitled to? Will your job be protected while you are away? In this article, we`ll give you an overview of the illegality for an employer to use pregnancy as a reason for adverse actions that otherwise wouldn`t have been taken, including dismissal, reduced responsibilities, or reduced pay. Wisconsin also requires certain parents to receive unpaid leave related to birth and adoption. It is illegal to harass a woman because of pregnancy, childbirth, or a medical condition related to pregnancy or childbirth. Harassment is illegal if it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or abusive work environment, or if it leads to an adverse employment decision (for example, if the victim is dismissed or demoted). The harasser can be the victim`s supervisor, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or someone who is not an employee of the employer, such as a client or client. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) is a federal labor law passed in 1993 that requires certain employers to provide workers with unpaid and protected leave for qualified medical and family reasons. The FMLA provides sick leave rights and protections for employees and can continue leave without pay for up to twelve weeks. Here are answers to some frequently asked questions about maternity pay.

Pregnancy affects different women in different ways. As a result, maternity leave laws such as the Employment and Housing Equity Act (FEHA) and the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) protect mothers who need maternity or maternity leave. For example, under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and CFRA, any eligible employee can take maternity leave in California, which includes: Our Wirral Advice Line 0808 802 0062 is designed for pregnant women and new parents living or working in the Wirral area. Open Monday to Friday from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. If benefits for other conditions are extended beyond the end of the employment relationship, maternity benefits must also be extended. If benefits end for other conditions, they may end for maternity. We have a counselling line in London for parents living or working in London and a national counselling line covering all other parts of the country.

We advise parents across the UK via email. We do not charge for emails or phone calls, no matter how many times you contact us. If we refer you to our employment processing service, you will receive ongoing advice from our lawyers free of charge. The following employers are required to grant their employees FMLA maternity leave without pay: No. An employer cannot treat a pregnant employee differently because of her marital status.

A.A. v. Newsom: On March 17, 2021, a San Diego County judge temporarily blocked enforcement of various regulations aimed at reopening schools in California after a group of parents of public school children filed a lawsuit. The state`s plan to reopen schools banned the reopening of middle and high schools in “purple” counties (i.e. counties with 7 to 10 COVID-19 cases per 100,000 residents). The plaintiffs also challenged the plan`s requirement that reopened schools keep at least four feet between students in classrooms. The plaintiffs argued that these provisions violated California`s constitutional and legal guarantees of quality education, educational equality, separation of powers, and due process. In her order, San Diego County Superior Court Judge Cynthia Freeland sided with the plaintiffs, calling the state`s reopening plan “selective in its applicability, vague in its terms and arbitrary in its regulations.” In response to Freeland`s order, California Health and Human Services Agency spokesman Rodger Butler said the state “will continue to lead the way in science and health as we review this order and evaluate our legal options with a focus on the health and safety of California children and schools.” Scott Davidson, an attorney for the plaintiffs, called the decision “a big endorsement of our position that distance learning is a failure, that education is a constitutional right, and that these children have been deprived of their right to distance education.” [21] [22] [23] Corporate governance claims can arise as many companies face financial challenges and even bankruptcy. Companies and their directors and officers may face class action lawsuits for breach of fiduciary and other duties to creditors and other stakeholders upon bankruptcy. 5,000 people who tested positive after returning from the Austrian resort of Ischgl have signed up for a class action lawsuit alleging that Ischgl and the Tyrol region put private gain above public health.

The plaintiffs allege that the defendants made a “commercial decision” not to end the season prematurely, which opened the door to three charges: creating a public danger; the spread of a reportable disease; and abuse of power through inaction. See “Coronavirus-infected après-ski in the Austrian Alps; Criminal investigations and litigation now follow thousands of tourists from the United States and Europe who fell ill after ski trips in late winter,” Washington Post, May 17, 2020, WLNR 13885110. Another China Class Action Lawsuit Alleges China Stockpiled Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and Refused to Send COVID-19 Shipments to the U.S. Aharon et al v. Chinese Communist Party et al, April 7, 2020, FL U.S. Dist. Ct., South 9:20-CV-80604 Auracle Homes, LLC v. Lamont: June 16, 2020, A group of eight Connecticut homeowners sued Governor Ned Lamont (D) in U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, trying to block two executive orders issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Executive Order 7G, issued on March 19, suspends uncritical court cases.

Executive Decree 7X, published on 10. April prohibits landlords from carrying out new evictions by July 1, provides an automatic 60-day grace period for April rent (and a 60-day grace period for May rent upon request), and requires landlords to allow tenants who have paid a deposit of more than one month`s rent to use that excess amount around April. Rent in May or June. The owners argue in their complaint that these implementing regulations “unlawfully deprived them of their constitutional right to private contracts, the right to due process, the right to equal protection of the law, and the right not to expropriate their property for public use without fair compensation.” Connecticut Attorney General William Tong defended the executive orders, saying they were “very clearly constitutional and fully legally justified.” The case was assigned to Judge Victor Allen Bolden. [54] [55] “We are committed to working closely with our law enforcement partners to combat fraud, waste and abuse in our government health programs,” said Chiquita Brooks-LaSure, CMS Administrator. “The administrative actions taken by CMS protect Medicare trust funds while protecting Medicare enrollees.” Flores v. Barr: On June 26, 2020, U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee ordered the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California to transfer migrant children detained in ICE`s Family Residential Centers (RCFs) to their families or sponsors by July 17, 2020. The order was issued following a decree issued on 26 March. March 2020, in which the plaintiffs, representing detained minors in a long-standing class action lawsuit, alleged that the continued detention of minors “in detention centers in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic and the national public health emergency” violated the Flores Regulation. The Flores Settlement is a 1997 court-supervised settlement agreement that regulates the conditions of detention and treatment of foreign migrant children in federal custody.

Gee`s order was limited to minors detained in the RCF for more than 20 days. It provided that removal “should be carried out at full deliberate speed”. The order goes on to say that ICE “must urgently enforce its existing COVID-19 protocols” prior to removal, including social distancing, wearing masks, and improving testing in all detention centers. Gee had previously ordered the federal government on April 24, 2020, to “continue to make every effort to release the minors promptly and safely,” an order challenged by ICE in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on June 23, 2020. [34] [35] “The Department of Justice`s Health Fraud Division and our partners are committed to eradicating the systems that have exploited the pandemic,” said Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite, Jr. of the Department of Justice`s Criminal Division. “Today`s enforcement action reaffirms our commitment to use all available tools to hold accountable health care professionals, leaders and others who prioritized greed over care during an unprecedented public health emergency. A cruise line has been sued in Florida for making false and misleading statements under the U.S.

Securities Exchange Act. The class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of individuals who purchased securities at allegedly artificially inflated prices between February 20, 2020 and March 12, 2020, causing economic harm. The cruise line issued a press release stating, among other things, that it (i) has a positive outlook for the company despite COVID-19 and (ii) has procedures in place to protect guests and crew. Emails were leaked on news channels suggesting that the cruise line had made false and misleading statements, causing its share price to plummet. Abraham Atachbarian v. Norwegian Cruise Lines et al, March 31, 2020, FL U.S. Dist. Ct., South 1:20-CV-21386 Class Action; Douglas v.

Norwegian Cruise Lines et al., 12 mars 2020, FL USA.

“Fraser Ritson is very experienced and has a very detailed legal knowledge. He is able to hold back, see the big picture and ensure that relevant options and possible solutions are always being considered. Takes the time to explain things to stakeholders who are not familiar with insolvency and is always available 24/7. Mayer Brown International LLP has “extensive knowledge of multiple sectors, regions and financing products” and ensures that it is well positioned to advise countless stakeholders, including lenders, funds, IPs, boards of directors and securities trustees and agents, on complex restructurings and insolvencies in multiple jurisdictions. Devi Shah, a permanent member of the team, “offers innovative solutions that lead to profitable results” and is particularly efficient in managing insurance and pension mandates. She leads the team alongside Michael Fiddy, a “highly experienced and efficient problem solver”, and Amy Jacks, who has “detailed expertise in UK insolvency”. Barry Cosgrave`s arrival in late 2020 from K&L Gates LLP broadens the team`s expertise given its “experience with challenging jurisdictions and emerging market modus operandi.” Dechert LLP`s growing team, which has recently welcomed the arrival of “laborious and dedicated” special situations, and Kay Morley, Jones Day`s cross-border restructuring expert, offers “world-class restructuring and insolvency expertise in UK and cross-border situations”. Recognised by one client as “one of London`s top restructuring lawyers”, Adam Plainer leads a “technically sound” team that includes Solomon Noh, who “brings unique skills to the London market with his US restructuring experience”. “Linklaters has a world-class restructuring and insolvency team in London – the team is incredibly responsive, commercial, practical and solution-oriented.” Reed Smith LLP`s multidisciplinary offering, which combines pure insolvency expertise with financial and corporate expertise, benefits from a “deep in-depth knowledge of different sectors and geopolitical scope” and provides “outcome-oriented” advice to a range of investors, creditors, debtors and IPs. Kathleen Garrett`s arrival of Arthur Cox is based on “sharp legal intelligence” and “an excellent understanding of commercial matters” and adds weight to the practice in special situations due to her long experience in the fund industry. It also strengthens the company`s strength in dealing with aviation-related issues.

Lawyer Patrick Schumann has “extensive knowledge of English insolvency law, which he uses to structure complex transactions”. Led by “technically very knowledgeable” Julian Cahn and complemented by a strong civil fraud group, Stephenson Harwood is best known for advising NPs on contentious insolvency matters, including aspects of asset identification and recognition of foreign judgments. This part of the practice was further strengthened in November 2021 with the arrival of Tal Goldsmith, “incredibly intelligent and knowledgeable” from Wedlake Bell LLP. Tim Crocker`s arrival in September 2021 from Allen & Overy LLP is also a letter of intent on the non-litigious restructuring front and expands a growing offering in this area, which includes Ian Benjamin, who has extensive experience advising on corporate restructurings and creditor and debtor restructurings. Weil, Gotshal & Manges (London) LLP, co-led in London by Andrew Wilkinson and Neil Devaney and also with a leading market presence in the US, “operates at an extremely and intensely high level” on behalf of a balanced mix of creditor, investor and debtor clients. In this context, clients appreciate not only the “highest level of legal advice”, but also the ability and willingness to act as a “true business partner”. Wilkinson is recognized as a “great tactician” and continues to focus on debtor work both on the corporate side, where clients benefit from Chapter 11 expertise when needed, and in terms of sovereign/state mandates. The “impressive” Devaney remains the driving force behind the creditor practice, having taken on high-profile work for creditors in a number of high-profile cross-border restructurings. “Calm and unwavering in a crisis,” Mark Lawford “combines incredible insolvency knowledge with solution-oriented advice,” even in the context of demanding insolvency proceedings. Gemma Sage is recommended along with Lois Deasey, who joined the team in the summer of 2022 as a partner in the London branch of Akin Gump LLP. “A wide range of lawyers qualified to handle a wide range of insolvency matters.” Latham & Watkins benefits from a “highly skilled and well-resourced” core restructuring team and is also able to leverage the company`s broader funding platform, including its impressive leveraged financing offering, and international network.

“Yen Sum is one of the foremost restructuring and turnaround lawyers in the UK and Europe” and leads much of the firm`s key work with respect to bondholders, reflecting its strong fund relationships and excellent record in transactions, including loans in special situations. The arrival of Bruce Bell from Linklaters in June 2021 further strengthened the team`s strength and he exerted direct influence on the debtor and creditor fronts and is known for his “excellent legal knowledge and ability to maneuver both debt and equity documents”. Jennifer Brennan “has a keen mind” and is praised for her ability to provide “highly innovative and commercial” advice to bondholders and alternative investors in large-scale cross-border transactions. Praised for her “responsiveness, clarity of thought and commercial nature,” Jessica Walker is also a key member of the team, covering contentious and non-contentious issues, particularly with respect to distressed transactions, pension plan restructurings, CVAs and settlement plans. Team principal Simon J Baskerville is also recommended. “Practical and business-oriented in its approach”, Charles Russell Speechlys LLP provides “user-friendly” advice to debtors and creditors in a range of formal domestic and cross-border insolvency and restructuring transactions, both in a corporate and personal insolvency environment. In particular, the firm acts on behalf of IPs who regularly engage it in complex matters that often involve difficult contentious aspects. In this regard, Jason Freedman is a “very strong advisor,” especially when it comes to allegations of fraud. Hanh Nguyen “is extremely smart and commercially savvy” and regularly advises incumbents on the sale of the business and assets of an insolvent company, as well as buyers of troubled companies.

James Hyne of Guildford leads the team. “Maitland Chambers is our preferred law and insolvency firm. All the silks and juniors seem to be good and the clergy team is also commercial and helpful. “They have extensive talent in insolvency matters and are equally proficient in related areas such as commercial disputes and real estate.” Drawing on a “combination of in-depth legal and industry knowledge while remaining commercial and practical,” Goodwin continues to gain traction in the London restructuring market both in stand-alone national mandates and in cross-border matters – where she often works with practitioners in the firm`s more established New York office. Simon Thomas “demonstrates an excellent mix of technical skills and a commercial approach” and has close ties with the IP community in particular. The team also effectively leveraged the firm`s expanded private equity and fund expertise and began taking on a significant amount of work for their distressed or distressed investments. This aspect of the practice has also recently been reinforced by the arrival of Tony Horspool, an attorney at Brown Rudnick LLP. “Creative, responsive and focused” Geoff O`Dea leads the team alongside Thomas and poses a dual threat, as he is not only due to his core restructuring skills (which include extensive knowledge of restructuring plans and plans), but also to leveraged financing transactions. Maitland Chambers is “an excellent set of rooms with enormous banking soundness”. Complementary expertise in related areas such as offshore, insolvency and fraud make it a target for high-profile commercial disputes. David Mumford KC and Thomas Munby KC are part of the team representing the Qatari government in Qatar against Banque Havilland SA, a lawsuit over an alleged plot by the bank and the UAE government that severed diplomatic relations with Qatar between 2017 and 2021 to provoke a run on the value of Qatar`s riyal and sovereign debt.

In addition to Duncan McCombe, Munby KC was also led by Andrew Twigger KC on behalf of the plaintiff in Bugsby Property v. LGIM Commercial Lending, which involved a claim for damages against a Legal & General group company for an alleged breach of an exclusivity agreement that ended in a four-week trial. “The team is practical and solution-oriented. They are able to think outside the box, understand the dynamics of transactions, and make practical suggestions to find a way forward. “Mark Fennessy is one of London`s most experienced insolvency and restructuring practitioners, versed in leading large cross-border cases.