‘The High Court has dismissed a second judicial review application by the trade union UNISON against the recent introduction of employment tribunal fees. Lord Justice Elias said that the union had not been able to provide evidence of “any actual instances” of individuals that had been prevented from making a claim by the introduction of fees.’
OUT-LAW.com, 18th December 2014
Source: www.out-law.com
‘The Divisional Court (Lord Justice Elias and Mr Justice Foskett) has dismissed Unison’s second-generation attempt to challenge by judicial review the legality of the Employment Tribunal fees system but gave permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. The “striking” reduction in claims (79 per cent fewer) presented to Employment Tribunals, Lord Justice Elias accepted, was evidence that the system was “extremely onerous” for people in the position of the hypothetical claimants construed by Unison in their legal argument but “not so burdensome as to render the right illusory” (paragraph 53).’
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th December 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘On the evidence before the court, the fee scheme imposed under the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 did not breach the European Union principle of effective access to a court and had not been demonstrated to be indirectly discriminatory to women.’
WLR Daily, 17th December 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Does use by an employee of a personal Twitter account in a way that is “intimidating, racist and anti disability” and “offensive to other groups of people including dentists, caravan drivers, golfers, the A&E department, Newcastle supporters, the police and disabled people” justify a decision to fire?’
Technology Law Update, 18th December 2014
Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk
‘In Kapenova v. Department of Health [2014] ICR 884, the first case of its kind in the health sector, the EAT has held that an entry criterion for the two year Foundation Programme for medicine graduates is a justified infringement of EU free movement rights. Kapenova demonstrates that: (i) a claim for unjustified infringement of free movement rights can be pursued as a claim for indirect nationality discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 before the Employment Tribunal, and; (ii) the approach to the justification defence under EU law and domestic law is the same.’
Littleton Chambers, 11th December 2014
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘In Sash Window Workshop v King theEmployment Appeal Tribunal returned to two of the central controversies in recent holiday pay case-law. Firstly the right to carry annual leave entitlement over from one leave year to the next. Secondly the right to claim back pay for untaken leave in historic leave years, particularly upon the termination of employment.’
Cloisters, 7th December 2014
Source: www.cloisters.com
Nayif v High Commission of Brunei Darrusalam [2014] EWCA Civ 1521; [2014] WLR (D) 508
‘Issue estoppel would not apply in circumstances where there had been no actual adjudication of the relevant issue and no action by a party which would justify treating him as having consented to not having the matter formally determined.’
WLR Daily, 27th November 2014
SOurce: www.iclr.co.uk
‘The Employment Appeal Tribunal has recently addressed an issue that is of particular interest to technology companies: could making a PhD an absolute requirement when recruiting be indirectly discriminatory against older applicants? Unfortunately the EAT did not come up with a definitive answer, but in the best academic tradition, it has reformulated the question.’
Technology Law Update, 2nd December 2014
Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk
‘In Chweidan v Mischon de Reya Solicitors [2014] EWHC 2685 (QB) Mrs Justice Simler considered the principles to be applied when assessing claims for loss of a chance and provided a helpful overview of a number of the leading authorities.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 17th November 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘An employment tribunal which decided to carry out its own internet research, apparently to help a litigant in person, has been condemned by Mr Justice Langstaff, president of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).’
Litigation Futures, 20th November 2014
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘At a time when the UK’s membership of the European Convention of Human Rights (“ECHR”) and our domestic Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA”) is a hot political topic, it is timely that the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) has handed down a judgment considering Article 6 ECHR in relation to special time limit provisions for discrimination complaints brought by those in the Armed Forces: Duncan v Ministry of Defence.’
Cloisters, 23rd October 2014
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘Ahead of this week’s EAT judgment in Bear Scotland Ltd v Fulton and Baxter, Hertel (UK) Ltd v Wood and others and Amec Group Limited v Law and others, employers feared the prospect of crippling retrospective pay claims dating back up to 16 years.’
Cloisters, 7th November 2014
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘I will look briefly at two points:
1. The re-consideration of the Mitchell approach in Denton shows a change in the judicial approach and may well be seen as helpful to EJs considering similar problems. Indeed, consistent with earlier CA authority, it may be that EJs will be expected to follow the same three stage approach as found in Denton.
2. The underlying reasoning of the CA in Denton may provide guidance on the approach to be taken towards a wider range of case management issues.’
Littleton Chambers, 27th October 2014
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE) have provided a wide range of case law since they came into force. Decisions have often been focused on issues such as what constitutes a relevant transfer or the effect ofinsolvency on a transfer. However, there has been surprisingly little case law which deals with the Regulation 13 TUPE duty to inform and consult and the Regulation 15 TUPE claim to a tribunal for a failure to inform and consult.’
Full story (PDF)
Tanfield Chambers, 16th October 2014
Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk
‘Last week, amid much media excitement, the Employment Appeal Tribunal handed down its judgment in the conjoined cases of Bear Scotland v Fulton, Amec v Law & Hertel v Woods. All three cases were appealing against the decisions of employment tribunals who determined that the calculating “normal remuneration” for holiday pay purposes should include overtime even if the overtime is not guaranteed.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 14th November 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘Staff who regularly clock up overtime could now be able to claim additional pay for annual vacation leave.’
The Independent, 4th November 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Employers are urging the government to rush through emergency legislation to save thousands of companies from having to pay out hundreds of millions of pounds in backdated holiday pay to up to 5 million people.’
The Guardian, 3rd November 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘“Why didn’t anyone in the know say something about it?” That’s the natural reaction of the public when some shocking new scandal – financial wrongdoing, patient neglect, child abuse – comes to light. The question highlights the role of the whistleblower. He or she can play a vital role in ensuring that something is done about activity which is illegal or dangerous. But the price which the whistleblower pays may be high – ostracism by colleagues, victimisation by the employer, dismissal, informal blacklisting by other employers who fear taking on a “troublemaker”.’
OUP Blog, 11th October 2014
Source: www.blog.oup.com
‘This article explores the relevance of the Civil Procedure Rules (“CPR”) rules pertaining to relief from sanctions to Employment Tribunal proceedings.’
Six Pump Court, 6th October 2014
Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has dismissed a solicitor’s call for an Employment Tribunal ruling – in which his claim against a local authority for race and disability discrimination was rejected – to be thrown out as not properly made, it has emerged.’
Local Government Lawyer, 30th September 2014
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024