Business Immigration – Changes Reflective of the Government’s Shift in UK Immigration Policy

In any business, when the wrong person signs something off (or the right person is not given clear authority to take a decision) the result can be costly. A simple example, based on our experience, is where an employee receives incoming correspondence or an invoice asking for a countersignature on a recurring software subscription or licence renewal, and signs it without checking the terms. Months later, the business is locked into an unnecessary spend that no one intended. That’s why a clear delegated authority policy isn’t just best practice, it’s a vital safeguard. It sets out who can commit the business to what, prevents avoidable costs and liabilities and gives everyone the confidence to act within their limits. What Is Delegated Authority? A delegated authority policy sets out who within an organisation can approve which actions. It typically includes guidance on which roles can enter into financial commitments (usually with different financial limits depending on seniority), who can enter into contracts, who can hire staff and who has signature authority for different types of documents. It ensures everyone knows: What decisions they’re empowered to make What signatures or approvals are required, and who can give them What limits are in place (financial, operational, reputational) to protect the organisation from acting outside its budget or business plans or exceeding its risk appetite. Why It Matters for Employers For employers, clarity around delegated authority helps to: Avoid financial risk – preventing unauthorised spend or commitments. Protect reputation – ensuring only appropriately senior people sign contracts, NDAs or external agreements. Increase efficiency – avoiding bottlenecks where senior leaders are dragged into small approvals unnecessarily. Empower staff – giving people confidence in the scope of their decision-making. Support compliance – ensuring regulatory, client and insurance obligations are met. Ultimately, a delegated authority policy protects both the business and its people, ensuring no individual is unfairly exposed and decisions are taken at the right level with the right oversight. What Happens Without It? Here’s what we see all too often when organisations don’t have a clear policy: Confusion and Delay: People waste time checking who has the right or responsibility to make a decision. Risk Exposure: Unauthorised commitments could expose the organisation to liability or financial loss. Morale Issues: Inconsistent delegation of authority – picking out people rather than roles, especially on a random basis – can create resentment. Compliance Breaches: without guidelines and controls, it is difficult to show that risk and compliance are managed effectively or spot when individuals are acting outside their powers. In contrast, organisations with well-defined frameworks experience smoother operations, clearer accountability and better risk management. Boardside’s View At Boardside, we see delegated authority policies as an underused but powerful governance tool. They are: A risk mitigator, reducing the likelihood of costly mistakes. A leadership enabler, freeing senior partners and directors to focus on strategy, not micromanagement. A cultural signal, demonstrating fairness, consistency, and accountability across the organisation. We also see that the best policies are simple, readily accessible, and regularly reviewed (and if necessary refreshed). A robust delegated authority policy should include: Defined levels of authority for Board, Executive and other management roles, and specialists (e.g.IT, customer-facing teams, procurement). Financial thresholds linked to role. Documented sign-off processes for contracts, client agreements, HR and vendor commitments. Clear role boundaries so staff understand both their powers and limits. Training and communication ensuring everyone knows where to find it and how to use it. Audit trails to evidence decision-making. Regular reviews to keep it relevant. We regularly work with boards to develop clear delegated authority policies as part of our corporate governance and strategy work. If you would like to discuss this in relation to your business please contact us .

Autumn pressures ahead? Navigating workforce expectations 

UK Business Immigration: the next wave of change 

Sexual Harassment: when do social spaces become ‘The Workplace’?

Whistleblowing: Post-Employment Protections Clarified

As part of its ongoing corporate transparency reforms, Companies House is introducing two important compliance requirements that directors and company secretaries should be aware of, one immediate, and one longer-term. Director ID Verification – Coming This Autumn From Autumn 2025, all company directors will be legally required to verify their identity with Companies House. This is part of the implementation of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, aimed at reducing fraud and improving corporate accountability. The process will involve confirming your identity through the Companies House portal or via an authorised third party. For UK nationals with a passport and standard secondary ID, the process is expected to be quick and fully digital. Directors who fail to verify their identity will be committing an offence and may be unable to act in that capacity until verification is complete. Boardside Law will become an authorised provider to carry out this process on behalf of clients. If this would be of interest to you, please let us know. Paper Accounts to Be Phased Out by April 2027 From 1 April 2027, Companies House will no longer accept paper accounts. All companies, including micro-entities and dormant companies, will be required to file accounts using compatible accounting software. This applies to: Audited and unaudited accounts Limited companies, LLPs and charitable entities Group accounts and subsidiaries Although the change is nearly two years away, we recommend that companies with financial year ends of 31 December or 31 March treat the 2026 accounting period as the transition year. This allows time to get familiar with digital filing tools ahead of the April 2027 deadline. A full list of compatible software providers is available here: gov.uk/software-company-accounts/y/audited/group There are also separate links for LLPs and charities. What You Should Do Now Directors: Watch out for further announcements about ID verification and ensure you complete this when required. Company Secretaries / Finance Teams: Review your current filing method and speak to your accountant about moving to compliant software if you haven’t already. If you would like advice on preparing your company for these reforms, or support with managing director filings or company secretarial duties, the Boardside team is here to help.

Whistleblowing: Reform on the Horizon 

The Government is backing a proposed major amendment to the Employment Rights Bill that would render certain non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) unenforceable. Specifically, the amendment targets clauses that prevent individuals from speaking out about unlawful behaviour, such as harassment, discrimination, sexual misconduct or bullying. This shift follows sustained criticism of how NDAs have been used to cover up workplace misconduct and protect serial offenders, particularly in high-profile sectors like media, technology and education. While the aim is to protect victims, the change could have unintended consequences for employers. If confidentiality can no longer be assured, some employers may be less inclined to settle disputes at all, which could in itself drive more claims to an Employment Tribunal. The proposals in terms of voiding certain agreements would also extend to employment contracts and internal policies, not just settlement agreements. What Is Changing? The proposed reform (an amendment to the Employment Rights Bill), which was tabled in Parliament on 7 July 2025, would: void any contractual clause that seeks to prevent a person from disclosing misconduct; apply not only to settlement agreements but also, potentially, to employment contracts, policy documents, and confidentiality agreements; introduce civil penalties for employers or advisers who breach the new provisions. Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner has stated that the purpose is to prevent NDAs from being used as “gagging clauses” that silence victims. Why This Matters for Employers: Fewer settlements? Without confidentiality, some employers may feel less secure in offering financial settlements to resolve complaints. Loss of control over reputation management: Public disclosure could increase the reputational risks for employers, particularly in unresolved or disputed allegations. Employee voice strengthened: The change would empower employees to speak out, but some may prefer private resolution. Removing this option may reduce flexibility. Boardside's View: We support the main aim of increasing transparency and preventing misuse of legal tool agreements which genuinely help parties resolve employment-based issues. We certainly accept that employers should not be allowed to abuse their positions. However, we share concerns that an outright ban may discourage settlement and create uncertainty for all parties. Action Points: Review all current template agreements and HR policies. Train HR teams and line managers on the lawful use of confidentiality provisions. Keep a close eye on the final form of the legislation as it progresses through Parliament. Boardside Law can support you in adapting your internal documents and approach to reflect the likely changes, as well as keeping you updated on the final wording and timeline of implementation. Contact us

AI and algorithmic decision-making is now deeply embedded in recruitment, performance tracking, and even disciplinary decisions. But the legal risks around automated decision-making is still evolving, and employers face serious compliance risks. What does the law say? Under UK GDPR, employees have the right not to be subject to solely automated decisions that have a significant effect on them. This includes decisions about recruitment (for example, CV screening by AI), disciplinary or capability outcomes, and performance rankings. Where such processing occurs, employers must: Provide meaningful information about the logic involved. Offer the right to obtain human intervention. Enable the individual to contest the decision. Key Risks Discrimination: biased data can lead to unlawful outcomes. Lack of transparency and explainability: AI systems are often ‘black boxes’, making it difficult to explain how decisions are made. Lack of documentation: employers may struggle to prove compliance without a proper audit trail. Failure to notify or offer human review. What employers should do Audit your use of AI tools in HR processes. Ensure there is always a human in the loop. Ensure transparency and accountability mechanisms are in place. Update internal data protection policies and privacy notices. Provide training to HR and senior leadership on AI compliance and ethical considerations. Boardside can support you in designing ethical and legally compliant approaches to AI in the workplace. Call us on 0330 0949338