If you’re too big for your boots, you may end up putting your foot in your mouth!

Whenever a new law comes into force, or a case is decided creating a new precedent, it’s automatic to start thinking not just of how it might apply to our clients, but also, how you might get around it.

My job is, after all, to protect my clients, so knowing what you can do, and what you can’t do (and how you might legally avoid it all together) comes with the territory.

Sometimes clients are way ahead of me in the avoidance stakes. Although sometimes, they get a bit carried away, and I have to warn them that they are trying to be too clever for their own good, and that they could easily end up tripping themselves up.

A favourite “trick” is to try and put something in someone else’s name, such as a relative or friend. I always point out the risks – if you give something to someone else, it is not yours any more, and although you may trust them to return it to you, nothing is ever guaranteed. Even if they are completely reliable and trustworthy, if they go bankrupt, become incapacitated, get divorced or just plain old die, that asset could fall into the hands of others, over which you have no control and who owe you no loyalty.

In employment law, it’s not uncommon for my client to tell me that they or the other party are self-employed, simply because that’s what the parties have agreed. I usually have to explain that they cannot avoid their liabilities under employment law simply by having a contract, any more than I can have a contract with my kids that they will phone me regularly. Or rather, I can have the contract, but my ability to enforce it is almost non-existent. They’ll call when they call, and your staff are either employees or they are not – it’s a question of fact and you cannot contract out of your legal obligations.

Another way that employers try to get around the law is by firing people, and then rehiring them on new/different terms. Again they will argue that it’s what the parties have agreed and that if the employee didn’t like it, they shouldn’t have signed the contract. Up until recently, you might have got away with that, but yet another loophole is being closed with the introduction of the Code of Practice on Firing and Re-hiring.

If you are thinking about putting staff through a redundancy process, with a view to dismissing them and then rehiring them to avoid or limit your legal liabilities, you should check the legislation to make sure you aren’t swapping one liability for an even bigger one. Or, even better, make sure you take legal advice before you finalise your strategy, to make sure you’re not about to fall flat on your face!

Kleyman & Co Solicitors. The full-service law firm. Avoiding you getting kicked somewhere painful – like your wallet!