Termination payments to Spurs players not subject to national insurance, Tribunal confirms – OUT-LAW.com

‘Payments to two footballers for early termination of fixed term contracts were taxable as termination payments and not as general earnings, even though the contracts envisaged early termination by mutual consent, the UK’s Upper Tribunal has decided, upholding an early First-Tier tribunal decision.’

Full Story

OUT-LAW.com, 4th December 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

MoJ plan to impose fixed-term contracts on judges “could be unlawful” – Legal Futures

Posted December 21st, 2016 in diversity, fees, fixed-term contracts, judges, judiciary, Ministry of Justice, news by tracey

‘Plans by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to impose fixed-term contracts on fee- paid judges could be unlawful, the Bar Council has warned.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 21st December 2016

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Márquez Samohano v Universitat Pompeu Fabra – WLR Daily

Márquez Samohano v Universitat Pompeu Fabra: (Case C-190/13); [2014] WLR (D)  129

‘Clause 5 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work, annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC, did not preclude national rules which allowed universities to renew successive fixed term employment contracts concluded with associate lecturers, with no limitation as to the maximum duration and the number of renewals of those contracts, where such contracts were justified by an objective reason within the meaning of clause 5(1)(a), which was a matter for the referring court to verify. It was also for that court to ascertain that whether the renewal of the successive fixed-term employment contracts at issue was actually intended to cover temporary needs and that rules were not, in fact, used to meet fixed and permanent needs in terms of employment of teaching staff.’

WLR Daily, 13th March 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Nierodzik v Samodzielny Publiczny Psychiatryczny Zakład Opieki Zdrowotnej im dr Stanisława Deresza w Choroszczy – WLR Daily

Posted March 17th, 2014 in contract of employment, EC law, fixed-term contracts, law reports by tracey

Nierodzik v Samodzielny Publiczny Psychiatryczny Zakład Opieki Zdrowotnej im dr Stanisława Deresza w Choroszczy: (Case C-38/13);  [2014] WLR (D)  127

‘Clause 4(1) of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work, annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC, precluded a national rule which provided that for the termination of fixed-term contracts of more than six months, a fixed notice period of two weeks would be applied regardless of the length of service of the worker concerned, whereas the length of the notice period for contracts of indefinite duration was fixed in accordance with the length of service of the worker concerned and could vary from two weeks to three months, where those two categories of workers were in comparable situations.’

WLR Daily, 13th March 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Fixed term tenancies: How hard can it be for a social landlord? – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted February 14th, 2014 in fixed-term contracts, landlord & tenant, leases, news by sally

‘In November 2010 the Housing Minister Grant Shapps identified what he perceived to be a problem with social housing:

“For far too long in this country there has been a lazy consensus about the use of social housing, which has left one of our most valuable resources trapped in a system that helps far fewer people than it should. This out-of-date approach has seen waiting lists rocket and is unfair to people who genuinely need social homes. They trap existing tenants in poverty, often in homes that aren’t suitable for them.”

After consultation the Government came up with some proposed solutions which involved a radical re-think of the way social housing was to be allocated and administered. The ideas included: flexible tenancies, fairer allocations, greater mobility, fairer provision for homeless, affordable rents and tenants’ powers of scrutiny.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 12th February 2014

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Carratù v Poste Italiane SpA – WLR Daily

Posted December 16th, 2013 in compensation, EC law, employment, fixed-term contracts, law reports by sally

Carratù v Poste Italiane SpA (Case C-361/12); [2013] WLR (D) 490

‘Clause 4(1) of the Framework agreement on fixed term work, annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC, could be relied on directly against a state body. The concept of “employment conditions” in clause 4(1) covered the compensation that the employer had pay to an employee on account of the unlawful insertion of a fixed-term clause into his employment contract but did not require the compensation paid in respect of the unlawful insertion of a fixed-term clause into an employment relationship to be treated in the same way as that paid in respect of the unlawful termination of a permanent employment relationship.’

WLR Daily, 12th December 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Hudson v Secretary of State for the Department for Work and Pensions – WLR Daily

Hudson v Secretary of State for the Department for Work and Pensions [2012] EWCA Civ 1416; [2012] WLR (D) 312

“Fixed-term contracts by which an employee worked on a government scheme regardless of when the scheme began or ended could not be included in any calculation of four years’ continuous employment which would otherwise allow a fixed-term employee to become a permanent employee.”

WLR Daily, 7th November 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Valenza v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (Joined Cases C-302/11–C-305/11) – WLR Daily

Posted October 22nd, 2012 in EC law, fixed-term contracts, law reports by sally

Valenza v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (Joined Cases C-302/11–C-305/11); [2012] WLR (D) 278

“Clause 4 of the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded on 18 March 1999, annexed to Council Directive 1999/70/EC, precluded national legislation which completely prohibited periods of service completed by a fixed term worker for a public authority being taken into account in order to determine the length of service of that worker upon his recruitment on a permanent basis by that same authority as a career civil servant under a stabilisation procedure specific to his employment relationship, unless that prohibition was justified on ‘objective grounds’ for the purposes of clause 4(1) and/or (4). The mere fact that the fixed term worker completed those periods of service on the basis of a fixed term employment contract or relationship did not constitute such an objective ground.”

WLR Daily, 18th October 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Huet v Université de Bretagne Occidentale – WLR Daily

Posted March 13th, 2012 in contract of employment, EC law, fixed-term contracts, law reports by sally

Huet v Université de Bretagne Occidentale (Case C-251/11); [2012] WLR (D) 71

“National legislation which provided for conversion of fixed-term employment contracts into an employment contract of indefinite duration when the fixed-term employment contracts reached a certain duration did not have to require that the employment contract of indefinite duration reproduced in identical terms the principal clauses set out in the previous contract. However, in order not to undermine the practical effect of, or the objectives pursued by, Council Directive 1999/70/EC, the member state concerned had to ensure that the conversion of fixed-term employment contracts into an employment contract of indefinite duration was not accompanied by material amendments to the clauses of the previous contract in a way which was, overall, unfavourable to the person concerned when the subject-matter of that person’s tasks and the nature of his functions remain unchanged.”

WLR Daily, 8th March 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Kücük v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen – WLR Daily

Posted January 30th, 2012 in contract of employment, EC law, fixed-term contracts, law reports by sally

Kücük v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen Case C-586/10; [2012] WLR (D) 11

“Clause 5(1)(a) of the framework agreement on fixed-term work, in the Annex to Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, meant that a temporary need for replacement staff, provided for by national legislation could, in principle, constitute an objective reason under that clause for the renewal of successive fixed-term contracts. The mere fact that an employer had to employ temporary replacements on a recurring, or even permanent, basis and that those replacements might also be covered by the hiring of employees under employment contracts of indefinite duration did not mean that there was no objective reason under clause 5(1)(a) or that there was abuse within the meaning of that clause.”

WLR Daily, 26th January 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families v Fletcher; Duncombe v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families – WLR Daily

Posted April 1st, 2011 in EC law, fixed-term contracts, law reports, teachers, unfair dismissal by sally

Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families v Fletcher; Duncombe v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families [2011] UKSC 14; [2011] WLR (D) 114

“It was objectively justified, under regulation 8 of the Fixed-term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002, for the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families to employ teachers on a succession of fixed-term contracts for secondment to European Schools.”

WLR Daily, 30th March 2011

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Duncombe and others v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families Fletcher v Same – WLR Daily

Posted December 17th, 2009 in EC law, fixed-term contracts, law reports, teachers, unfair dismissal by sally

Duncombe and others v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families Fletcher v Same [2009] EWCA Civ 1355; [2009] WLR (D) 36

“The rule embodied in the staff regulations made by the board of governors of the European Schools, limiting to nine years the period of employment of teachers seconded by the Department of Children, Schools and Families to work in the schools, did not meet the objective justification required by Council Directive 99/70/EC and the Fixed-Term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002.”

WLR Daily, 15th December 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.