PI claim to proceed despite tribunal settlement – Law Society’s Gazette

‘The High Court has allowed a PI claim to be pursued by an employee against his former bosses – even though the parties settled an employment tribunal claim over the same matter years previously.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 2nd September 2021

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Staying away from work because of Covid: a trap for employers? – Local Government Lawyer

‘Hari Menon looks at the problems that arise for employers where an employee stays away from work, pointing to the risks to his health from potentially contracting Covid.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 3rd September 2021

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

A constructive dismissal is, in principle, capable of constituting an act of harassment, within the meaning of section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 – 3PB

‘The EAT’s earlier decision in Timothy James Consulting Ltd v Wilton [2015] IRLR 368 had been decided per incuriam European Directives and domestic case law, in the light of which it was “manifestly wrong”. In so far as Wilton had decided that a constructive dismissal could not itself amount to an act of unlawful harassment within the meaning of section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 (“EqA”), it would not be followed.’

Full Story

3PB, August 2021

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

The ‘shifting’ burden and the drawing of adverse inferences – 3PB

‘The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed this appeal concerning two questions of law:
(i) whether a change in the wording of equality legislation has altered the burden of proof in employment discrimination cases, and
(ii) when a tribunal may draw adverse inferences from the absence of a potential witness.’

Full Story

3PB, 9th August 2021

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Determining the question of motivation in whistleblowing claims is not always as complicated as it seems – 3PB

‘Prior to her dismissal, the claimant was a senior employee with a continuous unblemished service record of 38 years.’

Full Story

3PB, 9th August 2021

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

PDS employee dismissed after work with murderer awarded £100k – Legal Futures

‘The Public Defender Service (PDS) has been ordered to pay £100,000 in compensation to an employee unfairly dismissed after suffering post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) due to her work debriefing a murderer.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 23rd August 2021

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

UK academic sues university after losing role in critical race theory row – The Guardian

‘Aysha Khanom claims discrimination after Leeds Beckett accused her of using “racist language” in tweets.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 16th March 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

Unfair dismissal and religion again: Ferguson v Kintail Trustees – Law & Religion UK

‘In Mr K Ferguson v Kintail Trustees Ltd & Anor [2021] ET 4103321/2020, the claimant was Director and Chief Executive of Kintail Trustees, a limited company that operates as the corporate trustee of the Robertson Trust, a charity. He was also an elder, the treasurer and a trustee of Stirling Free Church of Scotland’

Full Story

Law & Religion UK, 9th August 2021

Source: lawandreligionuk.com

Employer reasonable adjustment requirements highlighted in pay dispute – OUT-LAW.com

‘A recent ruling by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) provides useful guidance for employers about their obligations to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to pay to account for employee disability, an employment law expert has said.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 6th August 2021

Source: www.pinsentmasons.com

Menopause at centre of increasing number of UK employment tribunals – The Guardian

‘Growing numbers of women are taking their employers to court citing the menopause as proof of unfair dismissal and direct sex discrimination, researchers have said.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 7th August 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

Efobi v Royal Mail Group Limited: The burden of proof and drawing of inferences in discrimination claims – Littleton Chambers

‘The Supreme Court has delivered a unanimous and emphatic judgment on the burden of proof in discrimination claims. The decision has confirmed that the Claimant bears the initial burden of proof to establish a prima facie case, and so restored the orthodoxy that had been disturbed by the ruling of the EAT earlier in these proceedings. It also offers some useful guidance on the drawing of adverse inferences.’

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 23rd July 2021

Source: littletonchambers.com

New Judgment: Royal Mail Group Ltd v Efobi [2021] UKSC 33 – UKSC Blog

‘The Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed this appeal concerning two questions of law: (i) whether a change in the wording of equality legislation has altered the burden of proof in employment discrimination cases and (ii) when a tribunal may draw adverse inferences from the absence of a potential witness.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 23rd July 2021

Source: ukscblog.com

Ad men sacked to improve gender pay gap win sex discrimination claim – The Guardian

‘Two white male creative directors at a top London advertising agency have won a sex discrimination claim after a female director vowed to “obliterate” its Mad Men reputation of being full of straight, white men.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 23rd July 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

Firm that dismissed pregnant trainee cleared of discrimination – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted July 9th, 2021 in employment tribunals, equality, news, pregnancy, sex discrimination, solicitors by michael

‘A criminal defence firm has been cleared of discrimination allegations after telling a trainee solicitor she was being let go three weeks after she said she was pregnant.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 9th July 2021

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Forstater v CGD Europe: when is a belief worthy of respect in a democratic society? – Parklane Plowden Chambers

‘Choudhry J’s judgment in Maya Forstater v CGD Europe is well-reasoned and clear, and repays reading in full for anyone interested in the difficult interplay between the rights of those with conflicting protected characteristics.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 29th June 2021

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Indirect Discrimination Against Working Mothers – Littleton Chambers

‘On 22 June 2021, the President of the Employment Appeal Tribunal handed down judgment in Dobson v North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust UKEAT/0220/19/LA. CLICK HERE to read the judgment.’

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 23rd June 2021

Source: littletonchambers.com

Maya Forstater v CGD Europe and Others – No. 5 Chambers

‘What does it mean for a belief to not be worthy of respect in a democratic society? In Maya Forstater v CGD Europe and Others UKEAT/0105/20/JOJ, the Employment Appeal Tribunal sought to answer this question.’

Full Story

No. 5 Chambers, 11th June 2021

Source: www.no5.com

NHS nurse sacked over weekend working wins landmark ruling – The Guardian

‘A community nurse who was sacked for not agreeing to work weekends has won a “landmark” ruling for working mothers after a judge said employment tribunals must take childcare disparity into account.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 23rd June 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

Employment Tribunals: Interim Relief and the Equality Act 2010: Court of Appeal Declines to Extend the Relief – Littleton Chambers

‘For a few months, a radical change to employment law practice appeared to be in prospect.’

Full Story

Littleton Chambers, 16th June 2021

Source: littletonchambers.com

Whistleblowing: causation, guidance for complex cases and judicial proceedings immunity – 3PB

‘In GMP v Aston we receive a helpful reminder of the approach to be applied in cases where there are multiple protected disclosures spanning a significant period and allegations of multiple detriments involving multiple perpetrators and multiple victims. The case also involves an alleged detriment consisting of evidence given in other tribunal proceedings which was subject to judicial proceedings immunity (JPI) and deals with the issue of whether evidence which is covered by JPI can amount to a detriment. Finally, where the issue of JPI had not been raised before the first instance Tribunal, the Appeal Tribunal considered whether it had to deal with this newly argued point (i.e. whether it was mandatory) or whether it had a discretion to consider the newly argued point (i.e. whether it was discretionary). The considerations when deciding whether or not to exercise the discretion are also set out.’

Full Story

3PB, 10th June 2021

Source: www.3pb.co.uk