My company has used a firm of accountants for several years. But, after a recent audit, it came to light that a senior manager had been defrauding the company for three years. We have told the relevant authorities but my company is now in serious financial difficulty as a result. Can I make a claim against the accountants who failed to spot the fraud previously?

In principle, yes you can. But, depending on the facts, such claims are not straightforward. Because your auditors failed to detect the fraud does not mean they were negligent. The purpose of an audit is to enable auditors to provide independent confirmation that a company’s accounts give a true and fair view of its financial position. But protection of a company’s assets from fraud is primarily the duty of directors.

However, in performing their audit, auditors must provide a reasonable expectation that material errors in the company’s accounts caused by, among other possible reasons, fraud, can be detected. The larger the fraud, the more likely it has resulted in material inaccuracy in the accounts.

Even if the amounts stolen are not material to the picture given by the financial statements, if tests which the auditors should reasonably have carried out would have revealed the fraud, there may have been negligence. Only losses after the time when auditors should have discovered the fraud would be recoverable. The auditors might argue that deficiencies in the company’s internal controls or other errors for which the company was responsible contributed to losses caused by the fraud.

Andrew Neish is a barrister specialising in professional negligence at 4 Pump Court

I run a chain of pubs in London and, earlier this year, we made some permanent staff redundant. We now need to hire temporary staff for the Christmas and new year period. Is this a breach of employment rules?

No. Provided there was a genuine redundancy situation earlier this year, you would not be in breach of unfair dismissal legislation. But, if the redundancies took place less than three months ago, your former employees may be able to challenge their dismissals as being unfair.

Even if more than three months have elapsed, they could persuade an employment tribunal to use its discretion to consider their claims.

If challenged, you would need to make a business case for the redundancies by demonstrating that, at the time, there was a reduced need for the type of work those staff carried out. You might also need to show that it would not have been feasible to keep those staff on until the anticipated upturn in business over Christmas and new year.

Matthew Clayton is a partner within the employment team at Rickerbys, a law firm

I manage our sales team and public image is important. Although it is not part of the dress code, all female employees wear heels. Last week I received a complaint about “foot pains”. Do I need to specify a more sensible dress code to avoid claims?

Employers have a duty to safeguard their employees at work. If an employee suffers an injury due to footwear that they are encouraged to wear and the injury or condition is a direct result of wearing that footwear, you may have a liability.

In order to avoid a potential claim, you should provide literature on the effects of wearing heels, encourage employees to report any symptoms of pain early and refer them promptly to occupational health. If your shoe policy is targeted at women, it could be construed as sex discrimination. To avoid this, reword your dress code as a “sensible shoe” policy applying to both men and women.

Kathleen Potter is a solicitor in the workplace safety team and Laura Kearsley is an associate in the employment team at Weightmans, a law firm

I own two sandwich shops in London that are part of a larger UK franchise. I have recently heard that the main franchise has gone bust. I wish to continue running both sites. But might my business now be at risk?

Your business will be governed by the terms of your franchise agreement. You will need to establish whether, as a result of the franchisor going “bust”, the franchise agreement has come to an end. Since one of the main assets of a franchisor will be its franchisee base, the likelihood is that the company will have taken steps to protect the status of its franchise agreements.

Most franchise agreements allow the franchisor to transfer these agreements to a third party by providing written notice to the franchisee. It is likely that such notice has been, or will be, provided. You should find out whether that has happened or is about to happen. You should check whether the franchisor has gone into liquidation, administration and/or receivership.

Secondly, you will need to analyse what has happened to the assets of the business and whether they have been sold to a third party.

Finally, you should check whether your franchise agreement has been correctly assigned.

Once you have that information, obtain advice on whether you are entitled to terminate your franchise agreement (in which case you may be able to continue to run your shops as an independent trader) or whether you are still bound by the franchise agreement (in which case you could continue to run your shops but possibly under a new franchisor).

Andrew Pena is a franchising expert at Cubism Law