Blog
Private prosecutions – A route to justice for the charity sector
Sophie Tang
Despite various regulatory changes, firms can do more to prevent sexual harassment
Sexual harassment in the workplace has attracted growing concern globally over the past five years. The House of Commons Women and Equalities Select Committee (WESC) inquiry in July 2018 triggered a parliamentary debate around the need for stricter duties for employers to prevent unwanted sexual behaviour at work. In parallel, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has prioritised tackling sexual misconduct in law firms and recent changes to its Codes of Conduct emphasise the expectation on firms to foster a culture of zero tolerance to counter-inclusive behaviours, including sexual misconduct.
Under the Senior Managers and Certification Regime (“SMCR”), which was introduced by the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) to seek to remedy perceived industry wide failings following the 2008 financial crash, regulated staff must meet certain standards of fitness and propriety and will be personally accountable to the FCA for any failure to do so.
Firms covered by the SMCR are required to assess, both at the point of recruitment and on an annual basis, whether SMCR staff are fit and proper to perform their role. In the case of senior managers, firms that are covered by the regime must also seek approval from the FCA prior to appointment and in many cases the FCA may wish to closely scrutinise any such application.
On 10 May 2023, the Department for Business and Trade published a policy paper entitled, “Smarter Regulation to Grow the Economy” announcing, among other things, the Government’s intention to limit the period of non-compete provisions in employment contracts to three months.
Two days later, the Government issued its response to the consultation it had launched in December 2020 on proposed measures to reform post-termination non-compete clauses in employment contracts (the consultation had closed on 26 February 2021). That response echoed the earlier announcement and the Government’s intention to introduce a statutory limit of three months on the length of non-compete clauses. This is particularly interesting since the two main options for reform in the consultation were: (1) to make non-compete clauses in employment contracts permissible only where the employer provides consideration for the period of the restraint; or (2) making all post-termination non-compete clauses in employment contracts void and unenforceable. Despite the majority of respondents to the consultation being in favour of the first option, the Government has opted with this alternative approach.
Richard Fox, Jessica Clay and Lucinda Soon discuss what constitutes workplace bullying in light of the recent high-profile case against former justice secretary Dominic Raab
In the past month we have travelled a long way in a short period of time with regard to the area of bullying allegations at work. The most high-profile case to have hit the press on this matter is that involving the former justice secretary and lord chancellor, Dominic Raab.
Employers have been crying out for years for clarity as to what exactly is meant by “bullying” in the modern workplace. What counts as reasonable and constructive criticism on the one hand, and intimidating or insulting behaviour on the other?
Legal Notices | Privacy Notice | Fraud Warning | Modern Slavery Statement | Complaints | Website Terms | Cookie Policy | Accessibility | Site Map
© 2026 Kingsley Napley LLP. All rights reserved. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, registration number 500046.
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility