“‘How radical a change are the age discrimination provisions?’ The short answer is, ‘Very’, or, in the light of the two recent Judgments of the Supreme Court to this area of the law, ‘Very, very’.”
Full story (PDF)
11 KBW, 1st June 2012
Source: www.11kbw.com
“The decision of the Supreme Court in Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust & Botham v Minister of Defence [2011] UKSC 58 [2012] ICR 201 (‘Edwards’) represents the latest word from our highest domestic court as to the availability of damages for losses arising following the termination of employment. As has been usual of late, the Justices of the Supreme Court have spoken with several voices. However, the overall effect of the majority decision is to reaffirm and extend the orthodoxy represented by Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2001] ICR 480 (‘Johnson’), notwithstanding that this leads to a number of anomalies, from both the doctrinal and the practical points of view.”
Full story (PDF)
11 KBW, 1st June 2012
Source: www.11kbw.com
“Issues of confidence and confidential information are rarely out of the news. Whether the context is the privacy of celebrities, the disclosure of commercial confidences (in exciting arenas such as formula one racing) or attempts by employees to make use of their former employer’s trade secrets, issues of confidence interest the general public. Similarly, issues of confidence are rarely out of the courts. In the past year, there have been a large number of cases which have considered alleged breaches of duties of confidence. This talk is intended to discuss how some of these cases have developed or explained the law in relation to confidential information focussing on:
(a) the scope of duties of confidence;
(b) procedural issues in claims for breach of confidence;
(c) the application of the principles in confidence claims, to the inadvertent disclosure of
privileged material.”
Full story (PDF)
11 KBW, 1st June 2012
Source: www.11kbw.com
“What developments have there been now that the dust has settled on the Tullett litigation?”
Full story (PDF)
11 KBW, 1st June 2012
Source: www.11kbw.com
“The principles established in Prince Jefri Bolkiah v KPMG (A firm) [1999] 2 AC 222 were not applicable to a case in which the former employer of a patent attorney now employed within a competitor organisation sought injunctive relief to restrain the current employer from acting by, or otherwise seeking assistance or advice from, the patent attorney in relation to current litigation.”
WLR Daily, 31st May 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The Government will ‘reflect further’ on calls to remove restrictions on a new national pension scheme. However, it would be unlawful for it to do so simply to increase participation, it has warned.”
OUT-LAW.com, 6th June 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“The principles established in Prince Jefri Bolkiah v KPMG (A firm) [1999] 2 AC 222 were not applicable to a case in which the former employer of a patent attorney now employed within a competitor organisation sought injunctive relief to restrain the current employer from acting by, or otherwise seeking assistance or advice from, the patent attorney in relation to current litigation.”
WLR Daily, 31st May 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A man who used a forged passport to obtain a job with the NHS in Worcester has been sentenced to 12 months imprisonment at Hereford Crown Court.”
UK Border Agency, 29th May 2012
Source: www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk
“A draft Bill designed to reform certain aspects of employment law and encourage ‘strong, sustainable’ economic growth contains a provision which would allow the Government to radically reduce compensation awards for unfair dismissal.”
OUT-LAW.com, 24th May 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“The ‘fire at will’ employment proposals may have been doused, but that doesn’t mean employees are safe. They still have to fight their corner when it comes to dismissals.”
The Guardian, 24th May 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Rules making companies liable for harassment of their employees by third parties is one of a number of ‘unnecessary’ discrimination regulations that could be repealed in a drive to remove employment law related ‘red tape’, the Government has announced.”
OUT-LAW.com, 21st May 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“Sympathy with victims of sexual abuse should not be grounds for courts to extend the law on compensation ‘infinitely’ and impose extra liabilities on employers, the court of appeal has been told.”
The Guardian, 17th May 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Prisoners who take jobs outside jail have launched a High Court challenge to keep a great share of their wages, claiming too much goes to victim support.”
Daily Telegraph, 9th May 2012
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Earlier this month the Association of British Insurers announced the latest extension on the moratorium on the use of genetic test results for insurance purposes. But is this ‘Concordat’ sufficient protection? Genetic technologies are becoming increasingly available and profound questions are arising in relation to life and health insurance and employability as genetic screening becomes cheaper and widespread.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th May 2012
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Employers can continue to set the age at which their staff retire, but only if they can prove there is strong justification for doing so, following a ruling by the supreme court.”
The Guardian, 25th April 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A lawyer forced to retire at 65 lost a Supreme Court Appeal on age discrimination today.”
The Independent, 25th April 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
Meister v Speech Design Carrier Systems GmbH (Case C-415/10); [2012] WLR (D) 116
“European Union law did not entitle a worker who plausibly claimed to meet the requirements listed in a job advertisement and whose application was rejected to have access to information indicating whether the employer engaged another applicant at the end of the recruitment process. Nevertheless, it could not be ruled out that a refusal to grant any access to information might be one of the factors to take into account in the context of establishing facts from which it might be presumed that there had been direct or indirect discrimination.”
WLR Daily, 19th April 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“TUPE law should not apply when employees are moved to a new employer from two different original employers and should only apply to employees working on the specific tasks that are transferred, an Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) ruling has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 13th April 2012
Source: www.out-law.com
“At a time when 1 in 4 workers are now affected by work-related stress, it is unsurprising that lawyers too are seeing more occupational stress claims than ever before. Kate provides some timely guidance on how to sort the wheat from the chaff and considers whether McLennan v Hartford [2012] EWHC 346 amounts to a change in the landscape or more of the same.”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 3rd April 2012
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
“On 24th January the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in the joined appeals of Weddall -v- Barchester Healthcare Limited and Wallbank -v- Wallbank Fox Designs Limited. The common issue was: in what circumstances might an employer be vicariously liable for an assault committed by one of its employees.
In both cases the assault was in fact committed upon a fellow employee, although as the Court recognised, the same principles would normally be applicable to a case where an employee assaults a third party.”
Full story (PDF)
Zenith Chambers, 3rd April 2012
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024