“A gay black police officer who accused Scotland Yard of racial and sexual discrimination has won his case at an employment tribunal, which also found that another officer deliberately leaked a ‘distorted account’ of the claim to the Sun newspaper.”
The Guardian, 20th February 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A teacher who was sacked after writing a racy novel about her pupils has been told she will not face a full hearing by the General Teaching Council (GTC).”
BBC News, 13th February 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd [2011] UKSC 1; [2012] WLR (D) 24
“An employment tribunal could consider a claim for unfair dismissal by an employee who worked overseas if the connection between the employment relationship and Great Britain was sufficiently strong to show that that could be justified.”
WLR Daily, 8th February 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“One of England’s biggest hospital trusts has been accused of ‘institutionalised racism’ after a senior manager it sacked won almost £1m in damages for racial discrimination and unfair dismissal.”
The Guardian, 9th January 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Plans to lower the £84 million cost to the taxpayer, and relieve pressure on businesses, through the introduction of fees for employment tribunals were announced today by Justice Minister Jonathan Djanogly.”
Ministry of Justice, 14th December 2011
Source: www.justice.gov.uk
Abdulla and others v Birmingham City Council: [2011] EWCA Civ 1412; [2011] WLR (D) 342
“Where an equal pay claim under the Equal Pay Act 1970 was brought in an ordinary court within the six-year limitation period for bringing contract claims, the claim could not be struck out under section 2(3) of the 1970 Act on the grounds that it could be ‘more conveniently disposed of’ by an employment tribunal in circumstances where it was known to the court that the tribunal would have to decline jurisdiction to deal with the claim on the basis that it had been brought outside the six-month time limit for presenting an unequal pay complaint to the tribunal.”
WLR Daily, 29th November 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The 90 day minimum consultation period for collective redundancies may be restricting business and could be reduced as part of the most radical reform to employment law for decades, the Government has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 24th November 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
“Vince Cable has announced yet more employment law reform. Rajeev Thacker questions whether there is any justification for this further erosion of employee rights.”
Garden Court Chambers Blog, 23rd November 2011
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
“A vicar who claims he was driven out of his picturesque rural parish is attempting to make legal history by having his complaints against the Church of England heard by an employment tribunal.”
The Guardian, 23rd November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The rights of thousands of women working as lap dancers are to be tested after a judge ruled that an appeal tribunal should establish whether Stringfellows ’employed’ its performers.”
The Guardian, 18th November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The Employment Tribunal system is under attack! It is regularly exposed to criticism as being inefficient, costing those who participate in it too much money and amounting to a disproportionate burden on business. Such criticism has been made all the more fiercely of late both because of the economic climate and also because the Government has been reviewing the Employment Tribunal system with the express aim of reducing the burden placed on business by it.”
Full story (PDF)
11 KBW, 10th November 2011
Source: www.11kbw.com
A recession tends to lead to more claims but fewer trials. Employees naturally look for ways to maximise the value of their claims – particularly by reference to causes of action that bust the cap for a ‘vanilla’ unfair dismissal – often (in the case of high value employees) by reference to the whistleblowing legislation. The ‘bar’ for what qualifies for protection as a whistleblowing disclosure is set relatively low, and an employee dismissed from (say) employment in the financial services sector can usually identify something he or she has said in the recent past that can be held out as ‘revealing’ the employer’s true motivation for dismissing and/or as supporting a section 103A claim. On the flip side, recessions may give employers greater scope for ‘Polkey Chance’ arguments – market uncertainty undermines security of employment, and even if the employee has been unfairly dismissed now, who is to say that he or she would still have been in post in a year’s time?
Full story (PDF)
11 KBW, 10th November 2011
Source: www.11kbw.com
“When exercising its discretion under rule 40 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 to order costs against a party who had acted unreasonably in bringing or conducting proceedings, it was vital that the employment tribual looked at the whole picture of what happened in the case.”
WLR Daily, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Workers will have to pay to bring unfair dismissal claims and will not be able to do so unless they have worked for the employer for at least two years, the government has said. Under the plans, applicants will be obliged to pay the costs of an unfair dismissal claim – £250 for lodging a claim and a further £1,000 if the case goes to a hearing – which will only be refunded if the employee wins. The change to double the length of employment needed before a claim can be made will come into affect on 6 April 2012.”
The Guardian, 3rd October 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“An Indian couple who met at a UK law firm where they both worked are claiming wrongful dismissal because of discrimination by caste.”
The Independent, 18th August 2011
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The EAT has ruled that an employee summarily dismissed during a notice period cannot bring an unfair dismissal claim if the dismissal means they have insufficient length of service to raise a claim.”
OUT-LAW.com, 15th August 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
“Once an employment tribunal had found that there were terms in women’s contracts and terms in men’s contracts that were susceptible to comparison and that each of the terms was a distinct provision with sufficient content to make it possible to compare them so that the benefits conferred by the provision could be contrasted, it should proceed to compare them focusing on the equality of terms not of total pay actually received.”
WLR Daily, 28th July 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A solicitor who was paid through a profit share rather than receiving a salary should not be classified as a partner for employment law purposes, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 28th July 2011
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“Teachers who had been employed by the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families and seconded to work at European Schools throughout the European Union were entitled to bring unfair dismissal claims before an employment tribunal under section 94(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.”
WLR Daily, 15th July 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Tariq v Home Office (JUSTICE and another intervening) [2011] UKSC 35; [2011] WLR (D) 229
“The closed material procedure provided in the statutory scheme established for employment tribunals was in principle compatible with European Union law and article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998.”
WLR Daily, 13th July 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024