text:
Shop for the Best Price on Air Tickets!
Here we present great opportunities for experiencing one of the world`s last wilderness, Norway. Read about how you can wander around in the country`s breathtaking nature and enjoy a wide range of outdoors activities that really turn you on!
Halden canal in Norway - A journey through scenic areas
The crew on the boat MS Brekke took us this evening on a wonderful journey. We went through Norway's oldest channel system, the Halden canal. Here we enjoyed the beautiful scenery and spectacular locks.
Slottfjellet, Tønsberg, Tonsberg, Norway - A landmark in Norway`s oldest town
On a beautiful hot summerday, Friday 6h July 2018, I found Slottsfjellet site and tower in Tønsberg town really breathtaking - not only for its beauty, but also for its history, age, lanscape and viewpoint. The Slottfjellet Tower was lightened up by the strong sunshine. Here I got a full panorama view over the whole town.
Beatlemania in Moss, Norway - The Beatles Project rocked the audience to the fullest
Celebrated yesterday the music of the most famous pop group the world has ever known, The Beatles. Top music, strong energy, sing along and dancing at Øre Villa Kro, Moss, Norway. The Beatles Project from Norway, included Neil Tudor, Paul McCartney look alike from Liverpool, lifted Beatles fans to great heights.
Fredriksten fortress, Halden, Norway - Often attacked, but never conquered
The fortress is the site of some of the most dramatic events in Norwegian history. It has been attacked six times by the Swedish, but never conquered. The only way the Swedish could enter the fortress were as tourists.
Akershus fortress - Evening ghost walk in the old town of Oslo, Norway
The area is full packed with creepy stories that have made deep marks, especially at Akershus festning - a place for restless spirits. This fortress is believed to be one of the most haunted places in Norway, and I can understand why.
Akershus Festning, Akershus Fortress – Norway`s most haunted place!
Akershus Fortress, Akershus Festning, or Akershus Castle, Akershus slott, is a medieval castle that was built to protect Oslo, the capital of Norway. It has also been used as a prison. This fortress is also reknowned to be the host of several ghosts.
Viking battles at the Olavsfestivalen, Sarpsborg, Norway, July 2017
The Norwegian Vikings are still going strong. Full action at the festival Olavsfestivalen today 15th July 2017 in Landeparken by Tunevannet in Sarpsborg, Norway.
Nazi bunker Oslo Handelsgymnasium - In search for secrets
What is hiding beneath Oslo Handelsgymnasium in Oslo? Any big Nazi tresaures? As Nazi Germany began to fall in 1945 its leaders around the world hided the treasures they had looted. Following the World War II the school was inspected by the Norwegian resistance fighters and later the military. They found a large Nazi bunker four metres below the school, which was used as the Nazis headquarter in Norway during the war.
Nazi bunker Oslo Handelsgymnasium, Norway - Secrets underground waiting to be discovered
In late winter 1940 Oslo Commerce School new building was almost completed. The intention was that the school should be used from the early autumn in 1940, but this was not to be. When attacked on 9th April the German General Staff took into the KNA Hotel, now Scandic, across the street from the new school building. So he made some own plans for the school.
Norway from above - Fantastic views
Birkebeinerne - The Last King - Norway
The Last King is the story of the escape which changed the history of Norway forever. The original Birkebeiners, carried an infant king over the mountains from Lillehammer to Østerdalen in 1206.
Birkebeinerne - The Last King - Dramatic movie from Norway
Great opportunities for fishing in Vansjø, Vansjo lake, Moss, Oslofjord at Jeløya, Norway
Fishing in Vansjø lake is good for catching fish like perch, pike and more. It`s also good opportunities for fishing in the Oslofjord at the peninsula Jeløya.
Fishing after dark for trout can be one of the most exciting things you have ever done. Just imagine.. You can't see your hand in front of your face, the w
Read more at: http://Troutster.com


The award-winning Ronald Reagan High School Theatre Department routinely produces four to six shows per school year. There are usually two main stage productions in the fall and an additional show in our Black Box theater which usually coincides with our second mainstage production. The RRHS Theatre Department then combines forces with the choir and orchestra departments to produce an annual musical production in February. The musical is followed by the UIL One-Act Play competition in late March. The season concludes with a public performance of the UIL OAP followed by the Reagan New Works Festival.
Ronald Reagan High School is one of the seven high schools that are part of the North East Independent School District in San Antonio, Texas. It is a 6A school with a current student population of approximately 3,500. The school is located just north of Sonterra Drive and east of Stone Oak Parkway, next door to North Central Baptist Hospital.
Our shows are produced in the Gloria Jennings Robinson Auditorium at Ronald Reagan High School or the black box theater in the Fine Arts building of the Reagan campus. The auditorium features seating for 970 patrons, a large stage, fly system, stage lighting, sound, video projection and a large orchestra pit.


text:
Support Acts Latto
Parking View Parking
Three-time GRAMMY® Award-winning, RIAA multi-platinum certified artist Lizzo is fresh off the release of her anthemic new single "About Damn Time." Now, the superstar is continuing the launch of her new era by announcing The Special Tour, extensive North American arena dates with support from special guest Atlanta rapper Latto. New single "About Damn Time" heralds Lizzo's new album SPECIAL.
A 3x GRAMMY® Award-winning singer, songwriter, rapper, actress, and so much more, Lizzo has shifted the sound, soul, and spirit of popular music and culture. 2019's now-classic, RIAA platinum certified debut album, CUZ I LOVE YOU, bowed at #4 on the Billboard 200, fueled in part by such history-making hits as the platinum certified "Tempo (Feat. Missy Elliott)," the 2x platinum "Juice," the 4x platinum "Good As Hell," and the 7x platinum "Truth Hurts."
GA Floor Tickets
Guests with GA floor tickets need to enter the arena via Gate 1.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Merdud Takalobighashi (born 23 September 1975 in Tehran, Iran) (), more commonly known as Merdud Takaloo or Takaloo, is an Iranian born British based boxer.

Early life
Takaloo was born in 1975 in Tehran, Iran. His family later fled the country in the late 1970s after the overthrow of the Shah. His family arrived in the south of England and he is now based in Margate, Kent.

Career
Takaloo boxed from an early age and won a number of amateur titles. In 1997, he became a professional boxer, losing two of his first seven bouts.

At this time he changed trainers and joined Jimmy O'Donnell's gym in London.

Takaloo is a showboat who had good head and body movement, but usually ended up looking bruised, battered but unbowed. His gutsy style made him a popular fighter in England. A one time world title contender and later WBU welterweight champion, Takaloo had problems obtaining a passport to fight outside the UK, but became a British citizen. As an amateur, he fought 72 times, winning 60 bouts, before turning professional in 1997.

He won the fringe WBU light-middleweight world championship belt in 2001 by beating the then undefeated Anthony Farnell in Manchester.  Following that, Takaloo secured a shot with WBO champion Daniel Santos at Cardiff Castle, Cardiff when he fought for the WBO and WBU light middleweight title. Takaloo lost this fight on points over twelve rounds.

Takaloo then moved down to welterweight following defeats to Eugenio Monteiro and a chilling knockout loss to unpredictable puncher Wayne Alexander. This move seemed to have been a success as he won the vacant title against Turgay Uzun in February 2006 at the ExCeL Centre in London Docklands, and subsequently retained the title against Irish fighter Eamonn Magee on a points verdict.

Takaloo lost the WBU welterweight championship to former British Champion Michael Jennings by a unanimous points decision on 7 April 2007 and a further TKO loss to Anthony Small on 12 January 2008.

Honours
 2001 WBU Light-middleweight Champion
 2006 WBU Welterweight Champion

References

External links

 Guardian Article : Triumph and despair

|-

|-

1975 births
Living people
British male boxers
Iranian emigrants to the United Kingdom
Light-middleweight boxers
People from Margate
People from Tehran
Welterweight boxers

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Martin Quinn was on the receiving end of one of the most controversial Irish boxing results of 2018 but doesn't intend to let this stall his career.
It has been confirmed that Quinn will face Dublin rival Francy Luzoho LIVE on TG4 as part of the game-changing Assassin Promotions and Boxing Ireland Promotions 'Clash of the Titans' card at the National Stadium in Dublin on Saturday March 30th, the perfect tonic to a bitter disappointment.
The six-round fight comes four months after his one-point loss to Kelly, a fight which most onlookers, including his opponent's manager, felt Quinn had done enough to get the win. An immediate rematch looked inevitable but 'Mighty Martin' was then dealt another sucker punch when Kelly secured a shot at the vacant Irish lightweight title last month where he was stopped in the ninth round by Feargal McCrory in Belfast.
'Clash of the Titans' is headlined by a vacant Irish featherweight title fight between Eric Donovan and Stephen McAfee with further domestic dust-ups between light welters Victor Rabei and Jake Hanney, a pair of super featherweight bouts with Allan Phelan taking on Aiden Metcalfe and Kelvin McDonald facing Declan Kenna, and two light middleweights fights with Graham McCormack boxing Jade Karam and Cillian Readon clashing with Jordan Latimer.
The undercard also features appearances for Poleglass lightweight James Tennyson, Killarney super feather Siobhan O'Leary, Kilmacthomas welterweight Dylan Moran, Swords heavyweight Paddy Nevin, Waterford super middleweight Craig McCarthy, Jobstown super bantamweight Carl McDonald, Smithfield welterweight Keane McMahon, Shercock light middleweight and debuts for Milltown light heavyweight Kevin Cronin, Mayfield lightweight Thomas McCarthy, Clondalkin light heavyweight Paul McDonnell, and Kildare light welter Katelynn Phelan.


The ideal in powerful strength development while maximizing floor space, the 3227 Double-Sided Half Cage has all the regular features of the class-leading 3226 Pro Series Half Cage, but this time there are two of them back to back, allowing you to quickly process your athletes through the most demanding of strength training exercises.
11 gauge 3×3-inch tubing and 7 gauge, chrome-plated racking with laser-cut numbering.
Like most Legend Fitness items, the Pro Series Half Cage has been developed with three-dimensional CAD software to use as few fasteners as possible. This entire rack only has 12 bolts across 4 joints, reducing the possible points of weakness and maintenance. Compare to competitor's cages that use a bajillion bolts (roughly speaking… could be a kajillion).
Oversized, dual peg, fully welded bar catches with carry handle, number window and extremely durable yet replaceable polymer contact surfaces. Extended reach profile of hook increases safety without getting in the way. No metal-to-metal contact with the bar protects the knurling and means no rust, no paint chips and more energy absorption. In other words, the part of the cage you interact with most is AWESOME.
The safety arms were overbuilt for when something slips, featuring not only a 3×2-inch cross section and ABS wearguards, but an internal, solid, 1-inch racking rod.
12 chrome-plated, frame-welded, numbered, Olympic-size plate storage pegs that are slightly angled for safety.
2 angled storage pegs for resistance bands/chains.
Upright bar storage for up to 4 Olympic bars (can also hold the optional dip attachments and bench rods for the bench docking system).
NOTE: This cage can only fit through double-door entrances with a straight approach (no tight turns leading up to the door). Doorway opening must measure at least 110 inches diagonally.


text:
package org.kie.workbench.common.services.verifier.reporting.client.panel;

import com.google.gwt.user.client.ui.IsWidget;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
import org.kie.workbench.common.widgets.client.docks.DockPlaceHolderBaseView;
import org.mockito.InjectMocks;
import org.mockito.Mock;
import org.mockito.runners.MockitoJUnitRunner;

import static org.junit.Assert.*;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.mock;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.verify;

@RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class AnalysisDockPlaceHolderTest {

    @Mock
    private DockPlaceHolderBaseView view;

    @InjectMocks
    private AnalysisDockPlaceHolder analysisDockPlaceHolder = new AnalysisDockPlaceHolder();

    @Test
    public void presenterIsSet() {
        analysisDockPlaceHolder.init(view);
        verify(view).setPresenter(analysisDockPlaceHolder);
    }

    @Test
    public void viewIsNotNull() {
        assertEquals(view, analysisDockPlaceHolder.getView());
    }

    @Test
    public void setContent() {
        final IsWidget widget = mock(IsWidget.class);

        analysisDockPlaceHolder.setView(widget);

        verify(view).clear();
        verify(view).setWidget(widget);
    }

}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Beneficial variations invalidated by TUPE transfer
May 18th, 2020 by Simon Devonshire QC
What is the position if business owners employed by their own company award themselves substantially enhanced 'golden parachute' terms in advance of a TUPE transfer, confident in the expectation that those liabilities will be picked up by the unwitting transferee?
Tillman -v- Egon Zehnder; The Supreme Court Decides
July 3rd, 2019 by Simon Devonshire QC
1. The Supreme Court handed down its judgment in this case today; [2019] UKSC 32. It has not heralded quite the sea change in the law that some commentators had anticipated.
2. Ms Tillman had a contract that precluded her from being engaged, concerned or interested in a competing business (post termination), but omitted the conventional saving allowing her to hold a minority shareholding in a publicly quoted company. At first instance, the Judge (Mann J) held that properly construed, the restraint did not bite on a passive shareholding and made an injunction enforcing it. The Court of Appeal set aside the injunction, on the basis that the prohibition on being 'interested in' a competing business plainly extended to a passive shareholding and that part of the covenant could not be severed or blue-pencilled, applying Attwood –v- Lamont [1920] 3 KB 571 (severance of an apparently unitary covenants only possible where as a matter of grammer/construction it comprised two or more discrete restrictions).
'Wrotham Park' on the march; Court awards 10 Million Euros in negotiating damages for breach of an equitable obligation of confidence
October 3rd, 2014 by Simon Devonshire QC
In CF Partners (UK) LLP –v- Barclays & Ors [2014] EWHC 3049 (Ch), the High Court (Hildyard J) awarded the Claimant 10 million Euros as 'Wrotham Park' damages for breach of an equitable obligation of confidence. So far as the writer is aware, this is the largest award of its kind to date, and is indicative of the increasing judicial willingness to assess damages by reference to the release or licence fee that would have been agreed in a hypothetical negotiation; see my earlier post on the One Step case. The CF Partners case gives some interesting guidance on the nature and basis of assessment, as well as on breach of confidence as a cause of action more generally. Read more »
Wrotham Park damages for breach of restrictive covenants and illegitimate competition? The Court says yes in One Step (Support) Ltd –v- Morris-Gardner & Anor [2014] EWHC 2213
July 15th, 2014 by Simon Devonshire QC
In Wrotham Park v Parkside Homes [1974] 1 WLR 798, the Court declined to order a land-owner to destroy a property he had built on his land in breach of a covenant in favour of his neighbour. Instead, it awarded the neighbour damages in lieu of an injunction under Lord Cairns' Act, in such sum "as might reasonably have been demanded by the [covenantee] … as the quid pro quo for relaxing the covenant" (815). The Court assessed the damages as a modest percentage of the profit anticipated ("with the benefit of foresight") by the contract breaker.
Employment lawyers have sought to exploit Wrotham Park for some time now, particularly following the seminal judgments of the House of Lords in AG v Blake [2001] 1 AC 268, where it was held that in exceptional circumstances (where conventional remedies had no value) the contract breacher could be required to account for the fruits of his breach of contract. The implications of both decisions were considered in WWF-World Wide Fund for Nature v World Wrestling Federation [2007] EWCA Civ 286, a claim by the Fund that the Federation had breached contractual restrictions agreed between them on the use the Federation could make of the WWF initials. The Court held that in light of the judgment in Experience Hendrix LLC v PPX Enterprises Inc [2003] EWCA Civ 323, [2003] 1 All ER (Comm) 830, it had to be regarded as settled that, on a claim by a covenantee for an injunction and damages against a covenantor who had acted in breach of a restrictive covenant, the Court might, in addition to granting an injunction to restrain further breaches, award damages in respect of past breaches notwithstanding that the covenantee could not establish actual financial loss (para 48), in the sum it would have been reasonable for the covenantor to pay and the covenantee to accept for the hypothetical release of the covenant.
Much of the debate in the WWF case focused on the power to award damages in lieu of an injunction under Lord Cairns' Act, and the cases decided under that jurisdiction (and in particular Wrotham Park). However, the Court accepted (obiter) that such damages were available at common law (whether or not an injunction was sought). As Chadwick LJ put it at para 54 "the power to award damages on the basis of what it would have been reasonable for the covenantor to pay for a hypothetical release does not depend on the covenantee establishing (as a factual premise) that, absent a release, the covenant could have been enforced by injunction …". The Court also said that it was wrong to regard this as a "gain-based" remedy. Rather (para 55) "… that formula … was informed by the view … that the circumstances led inexorably to the conclusion that – had there been any negotiated release from the restrictions imposed by the settlement agreement – it would have been 'on terms requiring payment of a royalty'. The formula reflected the Court's view as to the basis upon which the hypothetical bargain between the parties, acting reasonably, would have been made."
Up to now attempts to apply that reasoning to breaches of post-termination employment covenants have met with resistance. Conventional wisdom leant against the award of such damages in the paradigm employee defection case. Wrotham Park damages are not available to the victim of a (contractual) breach as of right. They "are available in broadly two situations: … where it is impossible to compute the loss or where compensatory damages would be inadequate"; Lighthouse Carrwood Ltd v Luckett [2007] EWHC 2866 at para 58. The modern judicial development of Wrotham Park springs out of the House of Lords' judgment in AG v Blake [2001] 1 AC 268, and the development of remedies "for innocent parties who will suffer loss from breaches of contract which are not adequately remediable by an award of damages" (per Lord Nicholls). They will only be awarded where the Court is satisfied that they are "a just response to circumstances in which the compensation which is the Claimant's due cannot be measured (or measured solely) by reference to identifiable financial loss"; per Chadwick LJ in World Wide Fund for Nature v World Wrestling Foundation Inc [2008] 1 WLR 455. On even the more expansionist views of the availability of such damages, the Court has to proceed cautiously and incrementally, so as not to subvert the ordinary (expectation loss) principles governing the assessment of damages; van der Gaarde v Force India [2010] EWHC 2373 (QB) esp at paras 503, 505, 507 and 538. It must be "manifestly unjust" to leave the Claimant with no award (para 538). Such damages will not be appropriate at all where they provide relief "out of proportion to the real extent of the Claimant's interest in proper performance".
In BGC –v- Rees & Anor [2011] EWHC 2009 (QB) Jack J gave short shrift to a claim for Wrotham Park or transfer fee damages for the alleged breaches by individual brokers of their notice periods and PTRCs. The claims posited a hypothetical negotiation between the recruiter and the employer from whom the employee had been (allegedly) poached. Tullett Prebon (i) argued that Wrotham Park could not be used as a panacea where the loss could be conventionally assessed, but where the alleged breach had not in fact harmed the victim's economic interest, and (ii) pointed to the fact that there was no decided case where such damages had been awarded for breach of an employment contract. Jack J. agreed (at para 97): "I have concluded that in the present situation release payment damages are not available … In English law three cases are of particular relevance: AG v Blake [2001] 1 AC 268, World Wide Fund for Nature v World Wrestling Foundation [2008] 1 WLR 455 and van der Gaarde v Force India [2010] EWHC 2373 QB. The situation in the present case is one in which the court will ordinarily assess the loss of profit as best it may and award a figure. The assessment may be difficult depending on the evidence which is available. But the court is used to that, and can arrive at a figure just as it can, for example, in the difficult situation where it has to assess the loss of future earnings of a seriously injured teenager. The intended function of the claim here is to avoid BGC's problem that it cannot show that it has suffered any loss because it has not in fact done so. In my judgment the award of release payment damages is not available as a substitute for conventional damages to compensate a claimant for damage he has not suffered. Nor should it be used to award a larger sum than a conventional calculation of loss provides. [Emphasis Supplied]"
There were signs in subsequent cases that other decisions of the High Court might take a less restrictive approach. An attempt was made to claim Wrotham Park damages for breach of a confidentiality agreement in Jones –v- IOS (RUK) Ltd & Anor [2012] EWHC 348 (Ch). Whilst the Judge found that (on the facts) a hypothetical negotiation would have yielded no (or at most a nominal) licence release fee, he did not suggests that this sort of case was per se inappropriate for such an approach to the assessment of loss. On the contrary, he regarded it as "now well established that in an appropriate case damages for breach of contract may be measured by the benefit gained by the contract breaker from the breach … the court may award damages to the claimant to represent the price he could reasonably have extracted for requiring a licence payment in return for permitting the defendant to do what he has done" (para 97). However, the consideration of the hypothetical negotiation had to be "founded upon the underlying realities of the situation against which it falls to be undertaken" (para 108) and would only be appropriate where it was manifestly unjust to leave the claimant with no award (para 109). More recently, in Force India –v- I Malaysia Racing Team & Ors [2012] EWHC 616 (Ch) Arnold J concluded that what he called "negotiating damages" were available for breaches of both contractual and equitable obligations of confidence, although only where the claimant could not prove that he had suffered loss in any of the more conventional ways (para 424).
Which brings us to One Step (Support) Ltd –v- Morris-Gardner & Anor[2014] EWHC 2213. The claimant (a company providing supported living services to children leaving care and to vulnerable adults) alleged that the defendants (a former director and manager) had breached non-compete covenants and obligations of confidentiality by setting up and operating a rival business. The Court found the claim well founded. It declined a claim for an account of profits for breach of contract (on the basis that such a remedy was only available exceptionally following AG –v- Blake, and on the facts the breaches were relatively straightforward and unremarkable). However, the Court concluded that there was no need to find "exceptional circumstances for there to be an award of Wrotham Park damages, which might be considered to be simply one form of compensatory damages" (para 104), and that this was "a prime example" of a case in which such damages should be available – "[t[he defendants have breached straightforward restrictive covenants in circumstances where it will be difficult for One Step to identify the financial loss it has suffered by reason of the … wrongful competition, not least because there was a degree of secrecy in the establishment of [the defendant's] business which has not been fully reversed by the disclosure process" (para 106). The Judge buttressed the conclusion that negotiating damages were available because "the covenants provided that the restraint was subject to consent, not to be unreasonably withheld". He awarded Wrotham Park or ordinary damages, at the Claimant's election (para 108)
This judgment (if followed) seems to show a significant relaxation of the circumstances in which Wrotham Park damages might be appropriate. Indeed, the judgment doesn't recognise any of the notes of caution or restriction sounded in earlier cases (perhaps because they weren't cited or relied upon), and suggests that such damages are available on an either/or basis at the claimant's election (presumably depending upon the option that yields the greatest return). There was indeed nothing unusual about the facts of One Step – where ex-employees set up a competing business, their actions are almost always secretive and surreptitious. Even where a covenant does not recite that it may be relaxed by agreement, this is always possible by negotiation and it is hard to see this as a potent independent justification for the Court's order. Will One Step be regarded as a case on its own facts? Alternatively, if the approach on One Step takes firmer root, will parties start seeking to resist interim injunction applications on the basis that damages are (now) an adequate remedy for the employer? This judgment gives food for thought on many different levels.
Simon Devonshire QC
Societe Generale –v- Geys [2012] UKSC 63; how to dismiss an employee – orthodoxy confirmed?
December 21st, 2012 by Simon Devonshire QC
As Lord Sumption observed in Societe Generale –v- Geys [2012] UKSC 63, Mr Geys is "a lucky man". He was dismissed from his employment with SocGen in late 2007 or early 2008. The precise date of termination was critical. If his contract of employment was properly regarded in law as determining on 29.11.07 (when SocGen gave him a letter terminating his contract with immediate effect and promising that "appropriate termination documentation" would follow, and escorted him from the building) or on 18.12.07 (when SocGen made a payment in lieu of notice into his bank account) the termination payment to which he was entitled was limited to about Euros 7 million. If his contract did not in law determine until January 2008 (when he received the Bank's notification that they had exercised their rights under the PILON clause), his entitlements moved comfortably into double figures (at least according to reports of the case that have featured in the popular press).
It was common ground that had the Bank handed Mr Geys a cheque for his payment in lieu of notice on 29.11.07, his dismissal would have taken effect at once, in accordance with the PILON clause in his contract. But the Bank made a mistake and did not make the PILON for about 3 weeks – and then paid it into Mr Geys' bank account without giving him any direct notification. It was accepted that the Bank had repudiated Mr Gey's contract on 29.11.07, but (as Lord Sumption observed) this was a repudiation of the most technical kind, because there was no doubt about SocGen's right to dismiss with immediate effect (i.e under the PILON clause) if they had gone about things in the right way, and SocGen's mistake caused Mr Geys no loss.
The case raised two questions of "of general public importance" (Lord Hope at para 14) about the termination of contracts of employment. First, did a repudiatory notice of instant dismissal (the letter of 29.11.07) operate automatically to bring the contract to an end, or was it a 'thing writ in water' unless and until accepted by Mr Geys? And second, if Mr Geys' contract was still on foot after 29.11.07, had it been determined by the making of the PILON on 18.12.07? Read literally, all that the PILON clause required to bring about the termination of the contract was the making of the payment. Was this enough, or was something more required? These questions (and a couple of other questions of contractual construction specific to the case), were answered in Mr Geys' favour; he will no doubt be enjoying some Christmas cheer. This note addresses the two questions "of general public importance".
Unilateral or Elective?
Does a repudiation of an employment contract which takes the form of an express and immediate dismissal automatically terminate the contract or does the normal contractual rule that the repudiation must be accepted by the other party apply? The Supreme Court addressed directly the debate between the elective and automatic theories of contract termination, when applied to contracts for personal service, and confirmed (Lord Sumption dissenting) that the elective theory was to be preferred, both on authority and on principle.
Lord Wilson gave the principal judgment. It was common ground that whichever theory was selected "it would apply equally to wrongful repudiations by employers (i.e. wrongful dismissals) and wrongful repudiations by employees (i..e wrongful resignations)" (para 63). He referred to a number of categories of cases which could only be explained or understood on the basis of the elective theory: e.g. where provisions which did not survive the termination of the contract had been enforced against the repudiator (paras 69 to 72; the competition cases), or where the courts had obliged the repudiator by injunction to implement a contractual disciplinary procedure (paras 73 to 75; the disciplinary cases). He was satisfied that the preponderance of authority favoured the elective approach. He concluded that "[i]n proposing … the automatic theory, the Bank invites it [the court] to cause the law of England and Wales in relation to contracts of employment to set sail, unaccompanied, on a journey for which I can discern no just purpose and can identify no final destination. We should keep the contract of employment firmly within the harbour which the common law has solidly constructed for the entire fleet of contracts in order to protect the innocent party, as far as practicable, from the consequences of the other's breach" (para 97).
Lord Hope added some observations on the issues of principle. He considered that the automatic theory could operate to the disadvantage of the victim in a way which allowed the wrongdoer to profit from his own wrong, and the common law should favour the course likely to do the least harm to injured party (paras 15 & 17, 18). And he expressly disapproved the suggestion (found in Gunton) that the court could more easily infer acceptance in the employment context than in other contractual settings; "[i]f the law requires acceptance of the repudiation, the requirement is for real acceptance – a conscious intention to bring the contract to an end, or the doing of something inconsistent with its continuation" (para 17).
Lord Sumption's Dissent
In Lord Sumption's view, the employment relationship was dead for all practical purposes after 29.11.07. Because there had been a technical repudiation on that date, Mr Geys could rely upon the elective theory to argue that "technically the contract limped on as a formal 'shell' or 'husk' … into January 2008 … [bringing] him a windfall amounting to several million euros. Rarely can form have triumphed so completely over substance" (para 108). However, the elective theory of contract repudiation was apt to mislead, because the innocent party to a repudiated contract could not treat it as subsisting if (i) performance on his part depended on the cooperation of the repudiating party and (ii) the contract was not capable of specific performance (para 116). Employment contracts fell into this class. Lord Sumption suggested that whilst the employee could not treat the contract of employment as subsisting after a repudiation which terminated the employment relationship de facto, the repudiation would not necessarily bring to an end "collateral obligations" which were not (of necessity) dependent on the existence of the relationship of master and servant (such as express or implied covenants against competition). In his view "[w]hether collateral obligations of this kind bind after the termination of the contract or the underlying relationship will normally depend on the construction of the contract or the underlying nature of the implication if the obligation is implied … it is not necessary to prolong the life of a repudiated contract of employment in order to justify this body of law" (para 141).
What is required of an employer when giving notice?
The Supreme Court also gave consideration to the steps necessary to give notice of dismissal. It was not enough to make the PILON (notwithstanding that the PILON clause seemed to stipulate that this was the terminating event). According to Lady Hale (i) it was "an obviously necessary incident of the employment relationship that the other party is notified in clear and unambiguous terms that the right to bring the contract to an end is being exercised, and how and when it is intended to operate. Both the employer and the employee need to know where they stand …. the exact date on which the employee ceases to be an employee" (para 57); (ii) in a PILON case "[i]t is necessary …. that the employee not only receive his payment in lieu of notice, but that he receive notification from the employer, in clear and unambiguous terms, that such a payment has been made and that it is made in the exercise of a contractual right to terminate the employment with immediate effect" (paras 58 & 59); and (iii) "[g]iven that such a notice is a necessary incident of the relationship, a wise employer would take care to give it in writing", but whilst this was not required unless the contract so stipulated, simply making a PILON into the employees bank account was not enough, because whilst the employee's bank might be his agent for the receipt of payment, "it is not without more his agent for the receipt of notification of what the payment is for. That notification has to be given to the employee" (para 60).
Lord Carnwath expressed himself in similar terms on this question – "it was necessary for the employer to ensure that the payment was unequivocally identifiable as an exercise of power under [the PILON clause]" (para 103).
This question did not arise on Lord Sumption's analysis, although he did draw attention to the difficulties created by "highly technical questions about the validity of notices" that can arise if the contract is regarded as subsisting after the employee's exclusion from work (para 140). He also said that if Mr Geys had been entitled to affirm the contract after 29.11.07, "then all that was required to satisfy [the PILON clause] was the making of the payment in lieu. That seems to be more consistent with both the reality of the situation and the approach … in Abrahams -v– Performing Rights Society … and … in Cerberus Software Ltd –v- Rowley" (para 143). The majority, however, were with Lady Hale on this issue.
These judgments would seem to put to bed the debate about the elective and unilateral theories of contract termination in the employment context, and (unless and until the question is revisited in the Supreme Court), Lord Sumption's dissent is of largely academic interest (wherever one stands on its conceptual purity or practical validity). Lady Hale's judgment has revealed a new 'implied incident' of the employment relationship in exercising rights to give notice.
There is some force in Lord Wilson's view that the competition and disciplinary cases are inconsistent with the automatic theory and that to describe them as examples only of collateral obligations does not engage sufficiently with their significance (para 75). By way of example, it is difficult to explain or rationalise the garden leave injunction (where the employer does not accept the employee's repudiation but holds the employee to his good faith duty during a period of unexpired notice) with Lord Sumption's theory of collateral obligations; the good faith duty is a central incident of the employment contract. And as Lord Wilson points out, whilst the employment contract is a special case as regards remedies, the embargo on specific performance is not a hard and fast rule (e.g. where notwithstanding a repudiation, trust and confidence has not been forfeit; cf Hill –v- Parsons) and may need to be revisited given "nowadays the more impersonal, less hierarchical relationship of many employers with their employees" (para 77).
However, the judgments of the majority leave a number of questions unanswered, many highlighted in Lord Sumption's judgment. Is the employee entitled to wages after he has been wrongfully sacked and excluded from the workplace, but has declined to accept his sacking? Is he under any obligation to mitigate? Conceptual orthodoxy would suggest that the answers to these two questions are (respectively) yes and no. The contract subsists so he is entitled to the sums he is due pursuant to it, and how (to paraphrase Lord Sumption at para 139(5)) can the employee "be compelled … to mitigate the loss of his bargain when in law it has not been lost". However, this is not the result advocated in some of the leading elective theory cases (such as Gunton, suggesting that only damages will be recoverable after an exclusion from work and that the employee must mitigate). Take the paradigm example of the employee (wrongly) dismissed for gross misconduct. Can he decline to accept his dismissal and keep the contract alive? Must the parties await the determination of the court on the gross misconduct question before they know whether the employment contract has been effectively brought to an end? What is the employee to do in the meantime? Mitigate (as suggested in Gunton)? Even if that is right, where does this leave the employer – faced (per Lord Sumption at para 139(5)) with "a penumbral contractual liability, the duration of which is uncertain and the extent of which depends on the inherently uncertain question of whether he can show that the employee has failed to satisfy the relatively light burden of mitigating his loss". These questions have considerable practical implications and are not satisfactorily addressed in the judgments of the majority. Much remains to be worked out.
The duty of fidelity and penalty clauses; Imam-Sadeque –v- BlueBay Asset Management (Services) Ltd [2012] EWHC 3511 (QB)
December 13th, 2012 by Simon Devonshire QC
In Imam-Sadeque –v- Bluebay Asset Management (Services) Ltd Popplewell J had to consider the scope of an employee's duty of fidelity. He was referred to nearly all of the recent cases, but found them of "limited assistance" because whilst they provided "helpful guidance as to the application of the principles to particular cases …. the precise scope and content of the duty … and whether it has been breached, is a question of fact which depends upon the particular circumstances of the case" (para 132). That said, his judgment is an example of the recent direction of travel in the authorities, which as Hadden-Cave J observed in QBE (covered in an earlier post) has seen a tightening of the standards expected of an employee.
Simplifying the facts somewhat, the claimant was a senior employee with BlueBay, an asset management company. As at July 2011, he had been granted Fund Units (under a bonus plan) that vested between January and March 2012. Under the plan, he forfeited those fund units if he left before the vesting dates as a "Bad Leaver", and he was a bad leaver if he left voluntarily. In July 2011, the parties made a compromise agreement under which the claimant was placed on garden leave until 31.12.11, but would be treated as a "Good Leaver" (and thus entitled to his Fund Units) provided that he was not in repudiatory breach of his employment contract as at the date of the agreement and had not acted in repudiatory breach of that contract whilst on garden leave. Unknown to BlueBay, the claimant had agreed to join a new start up asset management company (Goldbridge) at the date of the compromise agreement, and he started working for Goldbridge after 31.12.11. BlueBay contended that the claimant was not entitled to his fund units because (i) he had assisted Goldbridge in planning and launching its competitive business and had failed to disclose to BlueBay that Goldbridge had the funding, resources and infrastructure in place to launch, (ii) he had encouraged and assisted Goldbridge to recruit one of his BlueBay colleagues, and (iii) he had disclosed various other pieces of information to Goldbridge (such as details of an internal restructuring, the terms of the compromise agreement and the terms of BlueBay's employee handbook and bonus plan) whilst on garden leave.
In dealing with the law, Popplewell J rejected three principal submissions made by the claimant:-
First, that the duty of fidelity required in essence no more than a duty to act honestly – rejected because "an honest but misguided disloyalty is no less a breach than a dishonest one" (para 126).
Secondly, that the claimant's duty of good faith was attenuated when he was placed on garden leave – rejected because "one of the common purposes of putting an employee on garden leave is to secure his loyalty to the current employer during the notice period, and to delay the transfer of his loyalty to a new employer until after its expiry. An employer may thereby legitimately seek to restrict the impact of any competitive activity by the employee, and protect the integrity of the employer's workforce. There is no reason in principle, or authority, why the aspects of the duty of loyalty which touch upon competitive activity, or the enticing away of employees, should be attenuated so as to interfere with these legitimate purposes of garden leave" (para 145).
Third, that the claimant was not obliged to disclose or report things told to him in confidence by a prospective new employer when exploring the possibility of moving employment – rejected because"if a senior employee, who is seeking to join what he knows to be a potential rival, learns of a competitive threat from that source, of which he would otherwise be under a duty to warn his employer, he can not relieve himself of that obligation by virtue of having entered into a contractual duty towards the rival not to fulfil it. If he could, the duty of fidelity in such cases could be bypassed or severely emasculated by the expedient of entering into an NDA with the competitor. It is not unusual for parties to undertake mutually inconsistent contractual obligations. The existence of one does not excuse non performance of the other" (para 148).
Applying these principles, Popplewell J concluded that the claimant's duty of fidelity (i) required that prior to 31.12.11 he should not have provided any assistance to Goldbridge in setting up and launching its business beyond agreeing to join, negotiating terms and making and cooperating in the legal, administrative and regulatory arrangements to enable him to start when free to do so, and (ii) obliged him to tell BlueBay that Goldbridge intended to launch a competitive business in October 2011, and had the infrastructure in place to enable it to do so (paras 150 and 151).
In the Judge's view "[a]ny discussion about 'how the business might develop,' or its 'philosophy' would likely be a breach of duty because it would assist Goldbridge in the formation of the shape and direction of the business" (para 155). On the Judge's findings of fact, the claimant's involvement in the Goodbridge launch went much further than this, and this may well have coloured his conclusions on the law, but how realistic is this extremely restrictive approach? Senior employees are obviously entitled to look for work elsewhere or to respond to approaches from head hunters. In any employment interview the candidate will have to sell himself to the prospective employer – to identify how he might fit in and what he is likely to bring to the table. Applying the conclusions expressed in this judgment, that might of itself place the employee in breach of his duty of fidelity, and he would be required to report the competitor's interest to his employer. In the Tullett Prebon case, Jack J accepted the validity of an express clause obliging the employee to disclose offers of alternative employment made to him, but this judgment comes close to saying that such an obligation will frequently arise by implication, as an incident of the duty of fidelity. And if an employee cannot legitimately give a prospective employer some assurances of confidentiality in relation to their discussions, doesn't this impose a practical inhibition on his ability to seek alternative work – at least without resigning first and placing himself on the open market?
The claimant also argued that the terms of the compromise agreement that provided for him to forfeit his Fund Units in the event of a breach of the compromise agreement was unenforceable as a penalty clause – the effect of the compromise agreement was to provide for the forfeiture of existing contractual rights (dependent upon performance of contractual obligations) on the occasion of any breach, however trivial, and did not constitute a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The Judge rejected that the doctrine was even engaged, because (i) "[t]he Compromise Agreement did not provide for forfeiture of his interest in his 2012 Fund Units upon breach of that Agreement, either in form or in substance. It conferred a conditional benefit in relation to his interest in the Units which never accrued because he failed to fulfil the condition, namely performance of the Agreement" (para 208), (ii) "even if the forfeiture were to be treated as occurring by reason of breach of the Compromise Agreement, what was forfeit were contingent future interests in the 2012 Fund Units. These are not to be treated as equivalent to the payment of a money sum by Mr Imam-Sadeque upon breach so as to come within the doctrine" (para 210), and (iii) "[t]here is a distinction between contingent rights and accrued rights. I would not extend the doctrine to apply to such [i.e contingent] rights in the light of the authority I have cited which dictates that because the doctrine is an interference with freedom of contract its application is not to be expanded more widely than its current limits".
In any event, the Judge found that even if the penalty doctrine was engaged, "it would [not] be right to categorise the terms of the Compromise Agreement, taken as a whole, as using the possibility of the Units not vesting in a way which is predominantly intended as a deterrent against breach. Their treatment is one element of a bundle of rights and obligations which must be viewed as a whole and is commercially justifiable" (para 232). The Judge was clearly impressed by the fact that the compromise agreement was negotiated at arms length by parties of equivalent bargaining power with legal advice. His approach echoes that taken by Nelson J in another penalty case (Tullett Prebon –v- El Hajjali [2008] IRLR 760 at patra 74) that "[w]here a bargain has been struck by two parties of equal bargaining power, with each party legally represented, a court should consider long and hard before permitting one of the parties to resile from that agreement."
Service Provision Changes; Court of Appeal confirms that client must stay the same
October 30th, 2012 by Simon Devonshire QC
The Court of Appeal has today handed down judgement on the appeal against Slade J's decision in Hunter –v- McCarrick [2012]EWCA Civ 1399. The Court of Appeal confirmed that the statutory concept of service provision change requires "the same client throughout" the change in service provider. This was the natural consequence of the words used and there was no need to import a purposive construction in domestic legislation that did not seek to give effect to EU law; paras 37 & 38.
The appellant had also argued that there had been a business entity (old style) transfer. This was rejected for a number of reasons that do not really advance the jurisprudence (paras 42 to 47), but does contain one point of interest. At the conclusion of his judgment, Elias LJ noted (para 48) that the appellant assumed that "if he could show that there was a regulation 3(1)(a) transfer, it would not matter that there had been a change in the client receiving the service". Whilst Elias LJ thought that this may be right, he said that the point was arguable and not covered by any authority. He ventured the observation that "it may be that where the business is in the nature of a service provided to a particular client, the identity of the client is an essential element in description of the undertaking", with the result that if the post transfer service was carried on for a new client, there could not be an old style transfer either. However, according to Elias LJ that was "an argument for another day", so watch this space.
October 4th, 2012 by Simon Devonshire QC
Simon Devonshire QC delivered this paper on Whistleblowing at the LexisNexis Conference. Click here to read the paper.
THE AVAILABILITY OF 'NEGOTIATING' (OR WROTHAM PARK) DAMAGES IN BREACH OF CONFDIENCE CASES
March 23rd, 2012 by Simon Devonshire QC
As Julian Wilson's earlier post on Force India F1 Team -v- 1 Malaysia F1 Team [2012] EWHC 616 mentioned, in this case Arnold J had to consider the correct approach to the computation of damages (or equitable compensation) in cases of breach of contractual (or equitable) obligations of confidence. His judgment gives some encouragement to employment lawyers seeking to use Wrotham Park (and similar cases) to recover what Arnold J chose to style as "negotiating damages". After an extensive review of the authorities, he concluded that such damages were available for breaches of both contractual and equitable obligations of confidence. He summarised the availability for damages or equitable compensation for breaches of obligations of confidence in terms as follows (para 424):-
"Where the claimant exploits confidential information by manufacturing and selling product for profit, and his profits have been diminished as a result of the breach, then he can recover his loss of profit. Where the claimant exploits his confidential information by granting licences to others, and his licence revenues have been diminished as a result of the breach, he can recover his lost revenue. Where the claimant would have 'sold' the confidential information but for the breach, he can recover the market value of the information as between a willing seller and a willing buyer. Where the claimant cannot prove he has suffered financial loss in any of these ways, he can recover such sum as would be negotiated between a willing licensor and a willing licensee acting reasonably as at the date of the breach for permission to use the confidential information in the manner in which the defendant has used it [Emphasis Supplied]".
The Judge also made some general observations about the basis of assessment. He said that (i) the assessment should be made as at the date of the breach, (ii) where nothing like a negotiation had taken place between the parties, it was reasonable to look at the eventual outcome and to consider whether or not that was a useful guide to what the parties might have thought at the time of their hypothetical negotiation, and (iii) the court could take into account delay by the claimant in asserting his rights (para 386). Moreover, in assessing the licence fee, "the availability or otherwise of the information from an alternative, lawful source was a highly material consideration … The more inaccessible the information, and thus more difficult it would have been for the defendant to obtain it by lawful means, then the higher the fee that will be payable, other things being equal" (para 426 & 427).
Arguably, this shows a more permissive approach to the availability of such damages that taken in the QBD in conventional post termination restrictive covenants cases (see, e.g., Jack J's judgment in BGC –v- Rees), and accords with the approach taken in Jones –v- Ricoh (another recent Chancery Division case). Both these cases are considered in earlier posts. Given that Arnold J applied his analysis to contractual and equitable obligations of confidence without distinction, it is hard to see why (in principle) it should not be adapted to (say) breach of a conventional non-compete clause designed to protect confidential information or police observance of obligations of confidentiality.
It seems to remain the position, however, that even where Wrotham Park or "negotiating" damages are awarded, they are likely to be conservatively assessed. In Vercoe -v – Rutland Fund Management Ltd [2010] EWHC 424 (Ch) Sales J had said (at para 292) that what was required from the Court was an assessment of a fair price for the release or relaxation of a contractual restriction, having regard to (i) the likely parameters given by ordinary commercial considerations bearing on each of the parties; (ii) any additional factors affecting the just balance to be struck between the competing position of the parties; and (iii) "the Court's overriding obligation to ensure that an award of damages for breach of contract … does not provide relief out of proportion to the real extent of the Claimant's interest in proper performance judged on an objective basis by reference to the situation which presents itself to the Court …". In Force India –v- I Malaysia, the claim was that Lotus had misused some of Force India's confidential information in the development of its car. The negotiating damages were said to run into millions. The Court awarded Euros 25,000.
THE NEED TO GIVE NOTICE OF WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS
March 20th, 2012 by Simon Devonshire QC
In the recent Caterpillar Logistics case (covered in an earlier post on this site), the Court of Appeal sounded a number of warnings against the deployment by an employer of over-aggressive litigation strategies in cases of suspected employee disloyalty. In O'Farrell –v- O'Farrell [2012] EWHC 123 (QB) Tugendhat J (the Judge in Charge of the Queen's Bench Non-Jury list) has deprecated "the number of spurious ex-parte applications that are made in the Queen's Bench Division". He also expressed "real concern" at the frequency with which the requirements of CPR 25.3 and PD 25A para 4(3) were ignored. These provisions require the applicant to explain why notice has not been given, and provide that except where secrecy is essential, the applicant should take steps to notify the respondent informally of the application. According to the Judge (paras 66 and 67):-
"In these days of mobile phones and emails it is almost always possible to give at least informal notice of an application. And it is equally almost always possible for the Judge hearing such an application to communicate with the intended defendant or respondent, either in a three way telephone call, or by a series of calls, or exchanges of e-mail. Judges do this routinely, including when on out of hours duty. Cases where no notice is required for reasons given in PD 25A para 4.3(3) are very rare indeed.
The giving of informal notice of an urgent application is not only an elementary requirement of justice. It may also result in a saving of costs. The parties may agree an order, thereby rendering unnecessary a second hearing on a return date".
The usual justifications for without notice relief in employee disloyalty cases are urgency and secrecy. This judgment is a timely reminder that mere urgency does not justify proceeding without notice. Applicants should expect O'Farrell to be prayed in aid on return dates if they cannot justify a failure to give at least informal notice. And as the judgments in Caterpilllar Logistics have already demonstrated, an unnecessarily "heavy handed approach" to litigation against defecting employees can colour the Court's approach to the availability of substantive relief.


text:
Roethlisberger to sit out Steelers Sunday game
By Ray Fittipaldo
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette/TNS
PITTSBURGH - Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger will not play in the regular-season finale in Cleveland on Sunday, opening the door for backup Mason Rudolph to start against the Browns.
The Steelers are locked into the No. 2 or 3 seed in the AFC and secured at least one home playoff game by winning the AFC North division title when they beat the Colts. They can become the No. 2 seed by winning on Sunday and if the Bills lose at home to the Dolphins.
But with only the No. 1 seed getting a bye in the first round of the playoffs, head coach Mike Tomlin decided it was in his team's best interests to make sure Roethlisberger is healthy and well-rested for the postseason.
Roethlisberger admitted last week he was not 100 percent healthy, and he was listed on the injury report a few weeks ago with a knee injury. There also has been some speculation his surgically repaired arm is tired late in the season, which might explain his and the offense's late-season struggles.
Rudolph will return to First Energy Stadium to face the Browns and Myles Garrett, who last year hit Rudolph in the head with his helmet after a late-game skirmish. It will be Rudolph's first start of the season. He was 5-3 as a starter last season when Roethlisberger missed the final 14 games due to his elbow injury.
Tomlin did not commit to resting any other starters, but he said a few others could be inactive if some players who sat out last week are able to return.
"We'll look potentially to resting some other guys, but the number of those guys and who those guys are will be determined as we push through the week," Tomlin said Tuesday afternoon. "Player availability dictates that."
If players such as Chris Boswell, Marcus Allen and Ola Adeniyi are able to return this week, it would allow some other starters to rest. Tomlin also indicated he would try to rest players during the game by being more liberal with his substitution patterns.
"I'd much rather preserve and protect players with a rotational mindset than to remove one player and expose the rest of the group to an abnormal number of snaps," he said. "It's a blessing to be in these circumstances and make these types of decisions. Make no mistake about it, it does not change our intentions. Football is our game. Our job is winning. We intend to do our job."
The Steelers have a chance to knock the Browns out of the playoffs with a victory. If they lose, the Browns are one of the most likely first-round matchups. Tomlin said that will not factor into his game-planning this week.
"It does not factor in whatsoever," he said. "We'll worry about the playoffs when we get there."
Several Steelers posted photos and videos that showed them celebrating without masks on in the locker room after their 28-24 victory over the Colts clinched the AFC North division title. That is a no-no under the NFL's COVID-19 protocols.
Tomlin said the NFL has been in touch with the Steelers about the violation and understands there could be some consequences for the players and the team.
Earlier this season, the New Orleans Saints were fined $500,000 and docked a seventh-round draft pick when NFL Films aired a piece showing their locker room celebrating without masks after beating Tampa Bay. The Saints were second-time offenders for league protocols and were previously fined $250,000.
The Steelers would be repeat offenders as well. They were fined $250,000 and Tomlin $100,000 for not wearing masks on the sidelines.
In the most shared video after the game, JuJu Smith-Schuster, Eric Ebron and Jaylen Samuels are shown in a video dancing without masks on.
"Obviously, emotions were what they were in terms of being divisional champs, but we are in a global pandemic," Tomlin said. "We take that very seriously. We have to control our emotions. It is a continual education process in terms of making sure that our guys understand how important it is that we adhere to the protocols of the pandemic.
"That being said, sometimes the education is punitive in nature and that's just the reality of it. But we will keep that business in-house and appropriately so as we work to keep all business in-house in that regard as it pertains to discipline.
"But make no mistake about it, we take this global pandemic very seriously. We take the guidelines prescribed by the NFL very seriously. We work our tails off to adhere to them, even in the midst of big emotional moments like we experienced after securing our AFC North divisional championship. In the midst of all the excitement, there are still lessons to be learned. There's still growth for us there. We do not run away from it. We run to it."
The NFL's decisions on how they penalize teams during the pandemic haven't been consistent, though. The Ravens were only fined $250,000 when they had the NFL's biggest COVID-19 outbreak of the season that forced several postponements, including three postponements involving the Steelers.
Tomlin has been widely criticized for taking three timeouts into halftime when the Steelers trailed, 21-7. Tomlin had a chance to call a timeout when the Colts faced a third-and-18 with over one minute remaining.
CBS sports analyst Tony Romo opined Tomlin did not call a timeout because he was duped by Colts quarterback Phillip Rivers, who feigned getting the Colts into a hurry-up offense before letting the play clock tick down and calling a running play with 26 seconds left.
Tomlin had a different explanation on Tuesday when he was asked about it. Two plays earlier, the Colts ripped off a 68-yard gain on a screen pass that was negated by a penalty. Tomlin said that development is the reason he did not use his timeouts.
"Really, I was taken aback by the screen we gave up just prior to that," Tomlin said. "I was more concerned about getting that unit off of the field without getting anymore splash plays. It's really unsettling when you give up a field-flipping play such as that.
"Thankfully that play was called back due to a block in the back, but we were fortunate there. Our execution was poor, and it really kind of changed my whole mentality about how the end of the half was unfolding."


FDA Explores Invokana Increasing the Risk for Amputation?
The FDA has issued a recent safety communication warning the public of the famous diabetes medicine canagliflozin. The safety issue was in relation to an ongoing interim clinical trial that found an increase in leg and foot amputations that mostly affects the toes, in patients treated with the diabetes canagliflozin.
The study also known as Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) revealed that amputations ensued roughly twice as often in patients treated with Canagliflozin in comparison to study groups treated with a placebo. Although it is not confirmed whether canagliflozin is the primary cause in increasing the risk of leg and foot amputations, the FDA investigation is currently ongoing and the public will be notified once more information is found.
Also available under the brand names Invokana and Invokamet, Canagliflozin is a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor that is prescribed for the treatment of high blood sugar in patients with type 2 diabetes. It works in lowering blood sugar by forcing the kidneys to excrete sugar from the body through urine.
This is not the first time the manufacturers of Inovakana, Johnson & Johnson have received public scrutiny. In December of 2015, Invokana was among several other SGLT2 inhibitors to receive prescribing label updates. This was shortly after the FDA learned that there was an alleged link between the class and the risk of ketoacidosis (is a severe complexity of diabetes that develops when your body engineers high levels of blood acids called ketones) and UTI's (urinary tract infections).
Be that as it may, the agency concluded that patients should speak to their healthcare professional prior to stopping or changing their diabetes medication as doing so can lead to harmful side effects related to uncontrolled blood sugars. The FDA also advised that patients receiving Canagliflozin for the treatment of diabetes should immediately notify their healthcare professionals if they notice signs and symptoms of new pain, tenderness, sores, ulcers or infections in their legs or feet.


Your phone is actually the dirtiest thing you touch all day. And you touch it all day. So here are some tips to make sure you clean it right.
Turn it off first. Not because you'll get shocked. You might mess with your settings or dial someone by mistake.
Use a solution that's half water and vinegar, or half water and rubbing alcohol. Or buy a spray bottle of stuff that's specifically designed for phones. Don't use household cleaners like Windex.
Smartphones have an oleophobic coating to prevent smudge marks and the chemicals in household cleaners can remove it.
Don't spray liquid directly on the screen. It's safer to spray the cloth you're using and then wipe it down. Just make sure you don't saturate it too much, because even a little bit of liquid can mess your phone up if it gets inside.
Don't use paper towels or any type of cloth that might have lint on it. Things like tissues or toilet paper seem soft enough, but even those can scratch your screen. So always use a microfiber cloth.


text:
Stella, l'amie de Maimie is a social justice and a community-based organization established and run "by and for" sex workers in Montreal. Also known as "Chez Stella", this community-based resource offers information for any woman-identified sex worker; be they street workers, escorts, strippers, employees of massage parlors, porn actresses, erotic phone entertainers.

Presentation of the organization

"Stella, l'amie de Maimie" is the only community group in Montreal that works exclusively and specifically with sex workers. Founded in 1995, "by and for" community organization has the goal of improving the life and work conditions of all women-identified sex workers in Montreal. Their programs also promote good health practices and the respect for the human rights of sex workers. The organization encourages empowerment and solidarity by and amongst sex workers, which means that all its actions favour the individual and collective responsibility of these sex workers.  Stella serves all kinds of sex workers and maintains an ongoing presence in sex work venues, including streets, escort agencies, massage parlors and strip bars.

The organization initially started with a founding board of four employees, and a dedicated group of volunteers and sympathizers. There is no specific religious affiliation within this organization. Stella participants are active on a number of committees, coalitions, research groups and boards of directors. Stella representatives are often invited to give lectures at conferences highlighting issues related to sex work.  The organization is also regularly invited to participate in artistic projects and events in Montreal. For example, in 2001, Stella took part in "Six personnages en quête d'auteur", a play directed by Wajdi Mouawad at the Théâtre de Quatre'sous."

Stella works at the municipal, provincial and national level to promote sex workers' rights, but also at the international level where it has affiliated with sex worker rights groups all over the world to fight for the same cause—the decriminalization of sex work. As explained in the "Dear Client" guide, one of the most asked question is "Why do sex workers do sex work?" The answer given by the organization Stella is "Sex work is work: an activity that generates income. Sex workers work first and foremost for money".

History of the organization
Stella was born in 1995 after the work of a consultative committee set up by the AIDS Study Center in collaboration with the AQTTS, (L'association Québécoise des travailleuses et travailleurs du sexe), some community-based organization representatives (Centre-ville et Centre-Sud de Montréal) and doctors in epidemiology. The sex workers involved in the committee's work on HIV prevention suggested that the best way to reduce HIV is to improve the life conditions and work conditions of sex workers.

To that end, Stella opened its doors in April 1995 to specifically support cisgender and transgender women working in the sex industry, including street workers, escorts, porn actress, erotic dancers, etc. Stella set up a participative structure where women current or former sex workers would have a major input at every level of the organization - as volunteers, as members of the administration council or just a member of the working team. Stella acknowledges that their knowledge and experience are invaluable for developing actions and its tools that best suit the specific needs of all sex workers.

Objectives
According to their website, the main goals of Stella are:
 To counteract violence done to sex workers and the different factors that gets them to be infected with HIV and STIs, that threats their physical integrity;
 To fight discrimination, isolation and the stigmatization lived by the sex workers;
 To promote the decriminalization of the different kinds of sex works;
 To provide support and information to sex-workers so that they may live in safety and with dignity;
 To sensitize and educate the public about sex work and the realities faced by sex workers;
 To encourage and support the participation of sex workers to the community and in the making of collective actions;
 To favour the creation of exchange platforms on the sex work, at the municipal, provincial, national and international level.

Stella favors empowerment and solidarity by and amongst sex workers, since the organization's worldview is that all sex workers internationally are committed to the idea that each of them has a place in society, and human rights worth defending.

Current activities
Stella is an ongoing organization that works in different levels of the society to promote some new understanding of the sex industry for sex workers and for the general public. It goes from helping sex workers to fight hepatitis or HIV, to publishing magazines, doing workshop for students or sex workers, working with the government for the decriminalization of the sex industry in Montreal and internationally to helping sex workers to get some work experience within a social justice organization.

	The current activities are divided in two different sections: (1) Information and (2) Outreach. The following offers only a summary of each. For more details about the extensive activities of Stella visit their website. Chez Stella

1. Information
Stella has a number of activities that are focused on welcoming, supporting and informing the sex workers. All of these are available through a number of community-based organizations situated in the hot spots for street prostitution in Montreal. Services include:
	phone line,
	drop in community meals
	Medical clinics (2X per month in collaboration with Medecin du Monde, tracking, vaccination hepatitis A and B, gynecologists, etc...)
	free vaccination clinics for hepatitis A and B in bars and detentions building
	legal clinics at Stella's offices
	Visits to sex workers in prison.
	programs of educative and community activities at Stella's locals

Stella also provides sex workers with support through the judicial process, social services and health services.

2. Outreach
Stella supports a number of outreach programs that go out into the environment where sex workers live and work. For example:
	the districts where there is a concentration of street prostitution;
	hotels and bars where the prostitutes or escorts recruit/bring their clients;
	bars with erotic dancers;
	restaurants and coffee shops where the sex workers take their breaks;
	escorts agencies, massage parlors, and the sex workers' apartment where they receive the clients;
	the places where the prostitutes toxicomans squat;
	pornographic film set,
	the incarceration buildings (federals and provincials)

Goals of Outreach
	To train volunteers (the majority being sex workers) about the individual and collective responsibility of sex workers;
	To mobilize sex workers for collective action efforts (actions, Forum XXX, International AIDS Conferences, etc.);
	To research and to analyze sex worker activities especially HIV/AIDS prevention efforts (this program is in collaboration with university and community partners);
	To circulate study results;
	To create workshops to education outreach workers, social workers and anyone in the general public who works with sex workers about sex workers' realities ;

Bad Tricks List
Another brilliant and useful activity done by this social justice organization is the "Bad Tricks and Assaulters Lists". It is a list given by sex workers to share the knowledge of dangerous people that might be in certain districts. This list is very useful for the sex workers and is published in the monthly bulletin and in the bi-yearly magazine called ConStellation.

Publications
Stella prepares a number of publications of interest to sex workers including:
	Constellation a free magazine for sex workers
	Bulletin Stellaire
	Hepatitis C brochure
	Clients guide
	violence prevention brochure
	Guide XXX
	Striptease guide
Stella also manages a website with all resources available electronically. All publications are bilingual and the Hepatitis C and the clients' guide are trilingual (French, English and Inuktitut).

	As an example of its usage here is a part of the latest ConStellation's editorial magazine. "By taking the initiative to produce a ConStellation that addresses the 7 major sectors of the sex industry through interviews with women who work in the pornography, erotic massage, street prostitution, domination, webcam, erotic dancing and the world of escorts, the Stella team has killed two birds with one stone. In addition to giving us a chance to share our knowledge about business and providing us with the opportunity to learn from each other, this ConStellation also presents a faithful portrait of the sex industry, with all that this implies, in North America today."   This proves an example of the use and the importance of these publications; to inform the general public and the sex workers from the sex industry about good tips, and share their experience of this sometimes challenging job.

Public Outreach
The last part of Stella's work for the improvement of the sex workers' lives is more focused on the sensitizing of the general public and the interveners from the health care system and the social services as much as the policemen and policewomen to the problems and the realities and the preoccupations that the sex workers may have. For example, this sensitizing could be done through meetings with students or interested groups that want to have more information, by holding an information desk in major conferences or forums or to have a public conference or many more public activities. It could also be by the writing of activity reports or community media mass articles.

This social justice organization also does a lot of information work of sensitizing to the shop owners, the people living in hot areas to participate actively in the different conversation tables of the districts and the group of organizations by themes.

All of these services are offered by employee and volunteer teams composed mostly by either sex-workers or ex sex-workers.

Current Organizational Features
As explained in the introduction, Stella started with only four employers and many volunteers; today on average twelve women work full-time for Stella and the membership continues to grow. There are many volunteers and sympathizers helping to write articles, draw the pictures for the publication, some also provide names for the List of assaults and many of the volunteers work on the streets (outreach) to help other sex workers.

The main team is formed of a president, a vice president, a treasurer, person-resource, administrators, outreach coordinator, outreach workers, clerk-receptionist, general coordinator, project officer, speakers and accounting.

Funding for Stella activities comes from donations and fundraising efforts with project support from provincial, municipal and private bodies.

Organization Website
Chez Stella, l'amie de Maimie

References

External links
Global Alliance Against Trafficking in Women
Network of Sex Work Projects
 Sex workers present on blip.tv
Laura Agustín : Border Thinking on Migration, Trafficking and Commercial Sex
Paulo Longo Research Initiative
Liste de discussion internationale TDS francophones
Sex Trade Workers Industrial Union 690 (Industrial Workers of the World)
Sex Worker Media Librar
International Sex Work Foundation for Art, Culture and Education

Bibliography
Stella, l'amie de Maimie. 2009. Editorial. Constellation, Special Working Conditions, April 10. (Available online: http://www.chezstella.org/stella/?q=en/constellation2009                     	(accessed February 20)).
Stella, l'amie de Maimie. 2004.  Dear Client, Manual intended for clients of                    	sex workers. Montréal.
Stella, l'amie de Maimie. 2009. Stella, l'amie de Maimie, official website.                        			http://www.chezstella.org/. (accessed February 13).
Tremblay, Francine. 2001. L'individu dans la modernité—Georges Herbert Mead,            		Charles Taylor and Alain Touraine. MA Thesis, Concordia University. (Available         	online : http://spectrum.library.concordia.ca/1521/1/MQ64034.pdf (accessed February 27)).

1995 establishments in Quebec
Organizations based in Montreal
Prostitution in Canada


text:
Solo Lucci On: Snitching + Alexis Skyy + Love & Hip Hop + New Music + More
posted by Daniel Travers - Mar 8, 2019
Hip hop artist and TV personality Solo Lucci stopped by to hang out with Frankie and Tati In The Morning on San Diego's Hip Hop and R&B Radio Station JAM'N 95.7.
While hanging out he gave us his thoughts on T-Pain's comments about Tekashi 6i9ine allegedly snitching, where he currently stands with Alexis Skyy, insights on being on Love & Hip Hop, how getting shot changed his life, new music and more!
Thanks for hanging out Solo!
New Music: Solo Lucci - Cash Money (Official Video)
Get To Know Solo Lucci Better
Solo Lucci is a rapper and supporting cast member on Love & Hip Hop: Hollywood since season four from Texas. He was born on April 14, 1995 in Forth Worth, Texas. Solo Lucci moved to Atlanta in order to expand his music and when he got there, he experienced several difficulties. Solo is best known for his single "Whip It," which earned more than 1 million listens on the music sharing site SoundCloud. The song has been used in Vine videos and memes by popular web stars.
Check out more Hip Hop & RnB Music Interviews.
Travis Thompson: Fave Marijuana Strand + Unique Image + Open Mics + More
Rapper Travis Thompson tells us his favorite marijuana strand, experiences with open mics and kid's programs, how his image may work in his favor and more!
posted by Daniel Travers - 5 months ago
Jez Dior: Getting Into Hip Hop + Dealing w Emotions + Eminem + Face Tattoos
Hip hop artist, Jez Dior, talks about getting into Hip Hop, how he's been dealing with emotions revolving around his dad, Eminem influences, thoughts on face tattoos and more.
DDG Drops YouTube Gems + Clout Chasing + More [EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW]
DDG stopped by to chop it up with Frankie & Tati In The Morning before his show in Los Angeles tonight. While hanging out in the studio, he tells us about his come up...
{"position1": {"catalog_type": "station", "description": "", "id": 261, "name": "JAM\u2019N 95.7", "station": {"call_letters": "KSSX-FM", "countries": "US", "description": "San Diego\u2019s Hip Hop and R\u0026B", "id": 261, "name": "JAM\u2019N 95.7"}, "stations": [{"call_letters": "KSSX-FM", "countries": "US", "description": "San Diego\u2019s Hip Hop and R\u0026B", "id": 261, "name": "JAM\u2019N 95.7"}], "type": "catalog"}}


text:
技术、媒体和通信 (TMC)
国际私人财富
房地产、基础设施和能源
生命科学和医疗保健
商业和专业服务
化学制品
金融机构和保险
酒店与休闲
制造业与工业
公共服务和教育
银行与金融
品牌和广告
商业和消费者合同
竞争、欧盟与贸易
版权和媒体
公司犯罪与合规
国际企业并购与资本市场
数据保护与网络
纠纷和调查
就业、养老金和流动性
环境规划与监管
环境、社会和公司治理 (ESG)
专利与创新
私人客户
私募股权
项目、能源和基础设施
房地产与建筑
重组和破产
风险投资
法域
爱尔兰共和国
法国德国团队
意大利团队
中东和非洲
非洲团队
以色列团队
巴西团队
印度团队
日本团队
新闻和观点
未来的工作
Interface: 技术、知识产权和媒体法
浏览所有观点
工作亮点
Quantum computing – the next (really) big thing
Quantum computing – the biggest threat to data privacy or the future of cybersecurity?
Quantum computing – the next (really) big thing – 4 / 4 观点
Debbie Heywood looks at the development of quantum computing and cryptography.
本版本中
Quantum leap – how are computers changing?
作者 Clare Harman Clark
Using quantum computing in life sciences
作者 Nabil Asaad, PhD
The investment landscape in quantum computing
作者 Ross McNaughton
Quantum computers are the fastest computers humanity has not quite seen. That is to say, we have seen them but we are still some way off a situation where quantum computing can solve real-world problems beyond the scope of current hardware. Let's call that 'quantum advantage' although the term means different things to different people and can sometimes be used interchangeably with 'quantum supremacy', usually taken to mean the solving of a specific problem faster than by using a conventional device.
'Big tech' businesses including IBM, Microsoft, Google and Amazon Web Services are working to develop quantum computing. In October 2019, Google announced it had achieved quantum supremacy. It claimed its 54-qubit Sycmamore quantum processor performed a specific task in 200 seconds which would have taken the world's most sophisticated computer 10,000 years to complete (although this was later challenged by IBM). At the end of 2021, IBM announced it had developed a 127 qubit processor and it is looking to produce a 1,121-qubit chip by 2023.QuEra announced shortly after that it had built a 256 qubit device using a different technology.
These developments, while impressive, do not provide quantum advantage, even if they do demonstrate quantum supremacy. More recently, however, Australian scientists announced that silicon quantum computers can now be operated with better than 99% accuracy. This is a huge step forward because the instability of qubits has been a fundamental stumbling block to accuracy and scale of quantum computing. More than 99% accuracy is thought to be the threshold at which quantum processors can be scaled into computers.
Estimates as to when quantum computing will go mainstream vary widely and IBM's optimism may yet prove misplaced. Many predict we still have decades to go, but most agree that QC is coming – it's a matter of when, not if. And it's not just big tech which has an interest. Governments around the world, notably China, India, the UK and the US, are competing to get ahead in a field which really does have potential to change the world.
Is the quantum apocalypse coming?
The (currently largely hypothetical) ability of QC to process enormous quantities of data at great speed (as discussed here) has a vast range of applications from life sciences, to financial services, to saving the environment, but currently gaining a lot of attention is its ability to crunch through encryption.
Imagine a computer with the processing power to break open every piece of information held about you anywhere online. In 1994, mathematician Peter Shor discovered an algorithm for finding the prime factors of an integer. Shor's algorithm is proven to be able to breach asymmetric or public key cryptography but today's computers would take billions of years to solve it. Quantum computers with a sufficient number of qubits would, however, be a different matter.
This could mean that data you gave up on assurances that it would be held securely, would be accessible to anyone with the right technology. Global financial systems, infrastructure, nuclear and military facilities, all vulnerable. This doomsday scenario is known as the quantum apocalypse and the race is on to head it off.
We may not know how soon quantum advantage will be achieved, but according to Mark Webber at the University of Sussex (as reported in the New Scientist), quantum computers would need between 317m to 1.9 billion qubits to beat bitcoin's encryption during the 10-60 minute interval each day during which a bitcoin transaction key is vulnerable. Even if that vulnerability extends to a day, 13m qubits would be needed.
Having said that, other systems are more vulnerable and would require less processing power to decrypt them. By way of example, breaking a standard 2048-bit RSA standard encryption scheme, the minimum key size recommended by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), would take a quantum computer with 20m qubits eight hours.
Quantum ethics - can the law help?
Is it possible for us to regulate the ethics of quantum computing in order to maximise the benefits while minimising the risks, effectively heading them off before we get to an apocalyptic future?
When the GDPR hit the statute books in 2016, it was hailed as a 'future proof' data protection law. Claims made around cybersecurity legislation have been less bold but the EU is close to agreeing its second Network and Information Systems Directive less than four years after the first came into effect which shows quite how much of a challenge it is to legislate effectively in such a rapidly developing area.
Just as the Data Protection Directive 1995 failed to protect personal data against the full force of the internet, the GDPR and other current data protection and cybersecurity legislation may look rather pointless in the face of quantum computing. The GDPR and its UK equivalent are already struggling to protect EU personal data from access by intelligence authorities in third countries. What sort of protection could these laws provide against a rogue actor with enormous quantum computing power?
We are already witnessing governments trying to legislate to regulate AI and prevent harm to individuals caused by algorithms, but as we have seen time and again when it comes to the law and technology, it's very difficult to write meaningful legislation to regulate hypotheticals.
And of course, laws have borders while technology does not. This is a geopolitical issue of potentially monumental importance, but global agreement on an ethical approach seems unlikely – after all, look how little we've achieved on the environment.
Quantum proofing
All is not yet lost because this is not a one track race. This is a potential problem caused by technology and the solution is likely to be found, at least initially, in technology. Alongside the push for quantum advantage, is the focus on post-quantum cryptography.
Encryption uses symmetric (private) and/or asymmetric (public) keys, sometimes along with other techniques like hashing. Symmetric key cyphers use the same key for encrypting a message or file while asymmetric ones used a linked private and public key. The public key is shared and the private key is kept secret to decrypt the information. Asymmetric encryption is more vulnerable to quantum processors than symmetric.
There are a number of techniques which may help extend the life of current encryption. One suggestion is longer encryption keys, but the longer they are, the slower and more expensive they are, and ultimately, quantum processors will still be able to crack them.
Creating new types of quantum-resistant encryption algorithms is the longer term goal. NIST launched a competition in 2016 which aims to produce quantum-proof algorithms by 2024. The winner is supposed to be announced this year and NIST recently confirmed there were 15 contenders left in the running from an initial 69. Most of the finalists focus on lattice-based cryptography.
Long thought to be one of the most promising post-quantum solutions, lattice-based cryptography uses grids with billions of individual points across thousands of dimensions. To break the code, you need to get from one specific point to another which (for some, if not all types of lattices) is virtually impossible without the keys. The private key is associated with the lattice point, and the public key is associated with the arbitrary location of the lattice point.
Another focus is on quantum key distribution (QKD) which aims to provide quantum-safe key exchange. Simplistically, it relies on quantum physics, sending photons individually through fibreoptic cables to allow detection of interference with the keys. China has reportedly gone beyond this approach by using a quantum communication satellite to send keys.
There are disadvantages to QKD including equipment requirements, but also vulnerabilities created in the equipment relay chain by implementation flaws. It remains to be seen whether it is the answer.
What can we do now?
Quantum cryptography may not be with us yet but 'harvest now, decrypt later' attacks are already a reality. Hackers are believed to be accumulating huge quantities of encrypted data in the hope that they will be able to decrypt it with quantum technology at some point in the future.
For most businesses, the focus at the moment should be on using robust cybersecurity which should be regularly reviewed to ensure it is up to date. However, breaches can't always be avoided, even with the best cybersecurity practices and technologies, not least because they are often a result of human error. This means it's important to minimise the amount of data likely to be accessed through a vulnerability, for example by using micro-segmentation and rotating encryption keys for each data classification.
As always, the more data rich the organisation and the more sensitive the data, the more important getting cybersecurity right will be, both now, and in the quantum future.
本系列更多内容
Interface 2022年3月14日
Clare Harman Clark looks at the coming revolution in computing and at some of the opportunities and risks of going quantum.
1 / 4 观点
Nabil Asaad looks at the potential for quantum computing to revolutionise life sciences.
Ross McNaughton looks at the focus for investment in quantum technologies.
行业 技术、媒体与通信 (TMC)
前往 Interface主页
数据保护和隐私政策
网络隐私和 Cookie 政策
有关费用的监管信息
客户投诉程序
反奴役宣言
垃圾电子邮件