A claimant made allegations of unfair dismissal, discrimination, and detriment resulting from whistleblowing. While his claim against the Council was subsequently withdrawn early on, the claim against the private limited company proceeded.

The respondent, however, argued that the claimant was a volunteer and that his claims were vexatious, threatening to apply for a strike-out order and a costs award in the range of £2,500 to £3,000, although the case was postponed due to bereavement. The conflict escalated when the claimant sent two emails to the Tribunal, the first expressing extreme concern over the respondent’s costs warning, stating that, in the absence of certainty regarding the maximum costs the Tribunal might award, he was considering withdrawing his claim. Later that afternoon, after receiving no reply, he sent a second email declaring that he wished to confirm the withdrawal of his claim unless the Tribunal assured him that no costs order would be made against him.

However, the Tribunal’s internal processing of these emails was disorganised, and the Employment Judge, having seen only the first email, correctly identified it as a potential tactical withdrawal and invited the claimant to clarify his position within 14 days. However, a staff member who had seen the second email, but not the first, sent a letter treating the claim as having been fully withdrawn and cancelled the upcoming hearing, although the claimant had since explicitly stated that he wished to continue with his claim. The chaos continued with the Tribunal asserting that the claim had been unambiguously withdrawn and could not be resurrected.

However, the Appeals Tribunal ruled in favour of the claimant as he had made his intent to withdraw conditional upon receiving advice or guarantees regarding potential costs. This ruling means that employers and respondents can no longer immediately rely on a frustrated or conditional email from a claimant as a “get out of jail free” card. Thus, in future cases, Judges are expected to be more interventionist when an unrepresented party suggests they want to drop a claim due to fear or pressure rather than through a genuine desire to end the pursuit of justice.

This case marks a potential end to the prevalent tactic of sending “warning letters” over potential costs to pressure claimants into dropping ‘weak claims’. While these letters are legally valid and often necessary, the bar for such tactics has now been raised, and respondents should be wary of using the threat of costs to trigger an automatic procedural win, as judges may now be more sympathetic to those in financial distress.

For many business owners, the focus is firmly on growth, profitability and day to day operations. Exit planning is often treated as something to think about later, perhaps a few years before retirement or when a buyer appears. In reality, leaving exit planning until the end can significantly reduce the value of a business and limit the choices available to the owner.

Business exit planning is not just about selling. It is about ensuring that the business can continue without relying entirely on the owner, whether the eventual exit is a sale, a management buyout, a family succession, or an orderly wind down. A business that depends heavily on one individual is harder to transfer, riskier to run, and usually worth less in the eyes of buyers, lenders and investors.

Early exit planning helps owners build value deliberately. This includes strengthening management teams, improving systems and processes, diversifying customer bases, and ensuring financial information is clear and reliable. These steps do not just support an eventual exit; they often lead to better performance and lower stress while the owner is still actively involved.

Tax planning is another critical element. Decisions made years in advance can have a major impact on the net proceeds of an exit. Reliefs, ownership structures, remuneration strategies and timing all need careful thought. Leaving this too late can mean avoidable tax costs and missed opportunities.

There is also a personal dimension. An exit is one of the most significant financial and emotional events in an owner’s life. Planning early allows time to define personal goals, whether that is retirement income, a new venture, or a gradual step back rather than a sudden stop.

In short, exit planning is not about leaving tomorrow. It is about running today’s business in a way that protects value, preserves choice, and gives the owner control over how and when they eventually move on.

The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics show that in 2025 the number of UK business births exceeded business deaths for a second successive year, pointing to a net increase in the total number of active enterprises. According to data from the Inter-Departmental Business Register, there were 313,715 new businesses created in 2025 and 285,245 that ceased trading, resulting in a net growth of 28,470 businesses on the register. This pattern suggests that entrepreneurial activity remains resilient despite broader economic headwinds and contributes to modest expansion in the overall business population.

Quarterly official statistics for late 2025 also reinforce this trend. Figures for the fourth quarter (October to December) show that new business formations increased by 10% compared with the same period in 2024, while business closures were 3.6% lower than in the prior year period. Growth in start-ups was recorded across most industrial groups, with particularly strong increases in transport, storage, information and communication sectors.

These statistics underline a shift from earlier quarters, where the balance of births and deaths fluctuated more and in some sectors raised concerns about churn and employment impact. However, the annual outcome for 2025 reinforces a net positive dynamic in UK enterprise counts. While the headline birth-death balance is encouraging, analysts note it remains important to monitor the quality of job creation and the survival prospects of new businesses as they scale. The figures are part of official statistics in development and will be refined as further data become available.

The Additional State Pension is only available to those who reached the state pension age before 6 April 2016 and are receiving the Old State Pension. The Additional State Pension is an extra amount of money paid on top of the basic Old State Pension.

The Old State Pension is designed to provide individuals of state pension age with a basic regular income and is based on National Insurance Contributions (NICs). To get the full basic State Pension, most people need to have had 35 qualifying years of NICs.

Claimants will automatically have received the Additional State Pension if they were eligible for it. Those who had contracted out were not eligible for the Additional State Pension.

If your spouse or civil partner dies, you may be able to inherit some of their Additional State Pension if you reached State Pension age before 6 April 2016. If you do not receive the full basic State Pension, you may be able to increase it by using your spouse or civil partner’s qualifying National Insurance years.

You may also be able to inherit part of their Additional State Pension or Graduated Retirement Benefit. Different rules apply if you reached State Pension age on or after 6 April 2016. If relevant, you should contact the Pension Service to check what you can claim.

Claiming Business Asset Rollover Relief allows for the deferral of Capital Gains Tax (CGT) when taxpayers sell or dispose of certain assets and use all or part of the proceeds to buy new business assets. The relief means that the tax on the gain of the old asset is effectively rolled over into the cost of the new asset with any CGT liability deferred until the new asset is sold.

Where only part of the proceeds from the sale of the old asset is used to buy a new asset a partial rollover claim can be made. It is also possible to claim for provisional rollover relief where the taxpayer expects to buy new assets but has not yet done so.

Business Asset Rollover Relief can also be claimed if taxpayers use the proceeds from the sale of the old asset to improve assets they already own.

The total amount of rollover relief is dependent on the total amount reinvested to purchase new assets.

The main qualifying conditions to be met to when claiming relief are as follows:

• you must buy the new assets within 3 years of selling or disposing of the old ones (or up to one year before);
• your business must be trading when you sell the old assets and buy the new ones; and
• you must only use the old and new assets for trading.

Under certain circumstances, HMRC has the discretion to extend these time limits. In addition, both the old and new assets must be used by your business, and the business must be trading when you sell the old assets and buy the new ones.

Taxpayers must claim relief within 4 years of the end of the tax year when they bought the new asset (or sold the old one, if that happened after).