1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |UK Employment Law & Risk Agenda: A look at the year ahead...

UK Employment Law & Risk Agenda: A look at the year ahead...

Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.25.10

In common with every other year, there are a number of key items on the UK employment law and risk agenda in 2010. Our key issues for the year are listed below. Click here to download a PDF of our full analysis.

Employment

  1. Increase in the Default Retirement Age… or will it be abolished?
  2. Single Equality Act
  3. Equal rights for agency workers
  4. Fit notes replace sick notes
  5. Additional paternity Leave
  6. Usual suspects I - Statutory payments
  7. Usual Suspects II - Unfair Dismissal and tribunal awards
  8. Time to train initiative
  9. Independent Safeguarding Authority
  10. Union rights

Risk

  1. Occupational Road Risk
  2. Occupational Fire Risk
  3. Occupational Health

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....