Covert recording in a PI claim: ramifications for Employment Tribunals? – 3PB

‘On 21 January 2014, a road traffic accident took place in Milton Keynes (liability having been conceded). The Claimant’s (hereinafter referred to as “C”) Honda Jazz was struck from behind by a Fiat Punto; there are 3 defendants (referred to collectively as “D”).’

Full Story

3PB, 4th November 2019

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

The Reason Behind the Reason Behind the Decision to Dismiss – Littleton Chambers

‘The Supreme Court has allowed the appeal in Royal Mail Group Ltd -v- Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55 and has held unanimously that when deciding what was the reason for dismissal in unfair dismissal, it may not be enough simply to consider what was subjectively in the mind of the decision-maker. In a unanimous decision delivered by Lord Wilson (Lady Hale (President), Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge and Lady Arden concurring) the Supreme Court has held that where the real reason is hidden from the decision-maker behind an invented reason, the court must penetrate through the invention and decide upon the basis of the real reason [paragraphs 60-62 of the Judgment]. ‘

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 27th November 2019

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Third party harassment – 3PB

Posted December 4th, 2019 in employment tribunals, harassment, news, race discrimination, third parties by sally

‘The Respondent (“R”) provides mental health services including a secure, residential unit for men who are the subject of a treatment order under s3 Mental Health Act 1987.’

Full Story

3PB, 4th November 2019

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Judicial Mediation in the Employment Tribunal: How to Make the Most of it – Littleton Chambers

Posted November 26th, 2019 in dispute resolution, employment, employment tribunals, judiciary, news by sally

‘Judicial mediation seems to be something of a Marmite topic among employment practitioners. Some see it as a cost-effective option for settling what might otherwise prove to be long-running and costly litigation. Others see it as a time-consuming and often unsuccessful exercise, conducted by individuals who are employed as judges (not mediators) for a reason.’

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 25th November 2019

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Law firm co-founder was not an employee, tribunal rules – Legal Futures

Posted November 22nd, 2019 in barristers, employment tribunals, law firms, news, unfair dismissal by tracey

‘One of the barrister founders of a pioneering legal aid firm in the North-East was not an employee or worker and so cannot bring unfair dismissal and other claims, an employment tribunal has ruled.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 22nd November 2019

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Employers are Liable for the Actions of Manipulators in Automatically Unfair Dismissals – Old Square Chambers

Posted November 19th, 2019 in employment tribunals, news, trade unions, unfair dismissal by sally

‘The EAT, presided over by the President, has in its judgment in Cadent Gas v Singh, set out four important matters in relation to dismissals for impermissible reasons including whistleblowing.’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, 14th November 2019

Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk

Boxer’s banker fails in negligence claim against lawyers – Legal Futures

‘A solicitor, his law firm and the barrister they instructed have been granted summary judgment on a negligence claim brought against them by a banker fired for his work with boxer David Haye.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 18th November 2019

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Teacher sacked over gay dating app activity wins £700,000 payout – The Guardian

‘A primary school headteacher who was sacked after having sex with two 17-year-old boys he met through a gay dating app has been awarded nearly £700,000 compensation by a tribunal.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 15th November 2019

Source: www.theguardian.com

£500 “not enough” to pay for LiP’s legal advice on settlement – Litigation Futures

Posted November 12th, 2019 in costs, employment tribunals, fees, litigants in person, news, unfair dismissal by sally

‘Employers paying for an employee to speak to a lawyer about settling a dismissal dispute need to stump up significantly more than £500 for proper legal advice, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 12th November 2019

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Secretary “humiliated” by comments on 50th birthday loses claim against law firm – Legal Futures

‘A legal secretary who claimed she felt humiliated and insulted by a colleague commenting on her 50th birthday has lost her claim for harassment and age discrimination against the law firm.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 8th November 2019

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

John Bowers QC’s Employment Law Blog: November – Littleton Chambers

Posted November 7th, 2019 in appeals, employment, employment tribunals, news, trade unions by sally

‘S145B of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Consolidation Act 1992 (“the 1992 Act”) is an under explored provision which has only just received the attention of the Court of Appeal, and has only once been considered by the EAT. It is important because some 26.3% of UK workers remain subject to collective bargaining but many employers seek every year to decouple from collective agreements in one form or another wholly or in part to buttress the managerial prerogative.’

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 4th November 2019

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

Bath Hill Court v Coletta [2019] EWCA CIV 1707 – Old Square Chambers

‘In an important decision, the Court of Appeal in Bath Hill Court v Coletta has held that, in an unauthorised deduction of wages claim for non payment of the national minimum wage in the ET, there is no backstop on the recovery of deductions, enabling Mr Coletta to claim 15 years’ worth of losses.’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, 17th October 2019

Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk

New law “to put more pressure” on solicitors’ NDA advice – Legal Futures

‘A new law ensuring that employees signing non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) receive independent legal advice will “increase the onus” on solicitors to act properly when drafting them, the government has said.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 30th October 2019

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Gilham v Ministry of Justice: A New Chapter in Employment Protection? – Cloisters

‘The Supreme Court has delivered its decision in the landmark case of Gilham v Ministry of Justice. In conferring the right to pursue whistleblowing complaints on judges – and for that matter all office-holders – it has opened a new frontier for the role of the European Convention of Human Rights in employment disputes.’

Full Story

Cloisters, 16th October 2019

Source: www.cloisters.com

In-house lawyer cannot rely on leaked email for discrimination claim – Legal Futures

‘A former senior in-house lawyer at Shell cannot rely on a leaked internal email or an overheard pub conversation in his discrimination claim against the company, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 23rd October 2019

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Whistleblowing judges: protected by human rights? – UK Human Rights Blog

‘The UK Supreme Court has unanimously granted an appeal by a district judge against the Court of Appeal’s decision that she did not qualify as a “worker” under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (the “1996 Act”), and therefore could not benefit from the whistleblowing protections it conferred.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 18th October 2019

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com

Redacting solicitor’s comments to client was “cherry picking” – Litigation Futures

Posted October 16th, 2019 in disclosure, employment tribunals, news, pregnancy, privilege, unfair dismissal by sally

‘Redacting comments made by a company’s lawyer on a draft dismissal letter while disclosing other privileged documents was “impermissible cherry picking”, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 15th October 2019

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

New Judgment: Gilham v Ministry of Justice [2019] UKSC 44 – UKSC Blog

‘The issue in the appeal was whether a District Judge qualifies as a ‘worker’ or a ‘person in Crown employment’ for the purpose of the protection given to whistle-blowers under Part IVA of the Employment Rights Act 1996. If not, was this discrimination against her in the enjoyment of her right to freedom of expression, protected by article 14 taken together with article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights?’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 16th October 2019

Source: ukscblog.com

‘Whistleblowing’ judge wins landmark appeal at Supreme Court – BBC News

‘A judge, who says she was bullied and had a breakdown after speaking out about government cuts, has won a landmark appeal at the Supreme Court.’

Full Story

BBC News, 16th October 2019

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Sexual discrimination ‘still a real issue’ in City financial firms – The Guardian

Posted October 14th, 2019 in employment tribunals, harassment, news, sex discrimination, women by tracey

‘The recent tribunal case brought by banker Stacey Macken shows that sexual discrimination remains a problem in London’s financial district, despite the shockwaves from the #MeToo movement.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 14th October 2019

Source: www.theguardian.com