Considering the intersection of the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) and the doctrine of relation back, a California appellate panel found that the doctrine can apply to the statute, opening the door to a subsequent employee to move forward with a suit dating back to the date the initial complaint was filed.
Larry Van Steenhuyse worked for UBS Financial Services as a financial advisor. On December 22, 2017, he gave notice to UBS and the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) that he intended to seek penalties under PAGA on behalf of himself and all aggrieved UBS financial advisors in California for alleged Labor Code violations.
He claimed that UBS failed to reimburse financial advisors for routinely incurred reasonable and necessary business expenses for travel, mileage, education, entertainment and marketing.
Van Steenhuyse filed his PAGA lawsuit on February 26, 2018.
A second UBS financial advisor, Andrew Hutcheson, submitted his notice of intent to sue over UBS’ alleged failure to reimburse business expenses on April 18, 2018, and filed suit in February 2019.
The notices and complaints were worded almost identically and they made the same allegations of facts and theories concerning UBS’ purported Labor Code violations.
In March 2019, Hutcheson filed a motion to intervene and replace Van Steenhuyse as the named plaintiff. He sought to extend the statute of limitations back to December 22, 2016, or one year before Van Steenhuyse submitted his notice of...
GB News presenter Alex Armstrong and right-wing social media commentator Bernadette Spofforth have apologised and paid substantial damages to Green Party deputy leader Mothin Ali after falsely sug...