ICTS (UK) Ltd v Visram (2020) EWCA 202 – Old Square Chambers

‘Do the words “return to work” in a long-term disability scheme mean return to any work or the work that the employee was undertaking prior to going on long term sickness?’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, 24th February 2020

Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk

DWP ordered to pay former trainee £400k over racism and ageism – The Guardian

‘A woman is to receive nearly £400,000 from the Department for Work and Pensions after a judge ruled that her colleagues there had deliberately created a “hostile environment” of racism and ageism that forced her out of work.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 25th February 2020

Source: www.theguardian.com

Reasonable adjustments – Is it relevant that the employee didn’t mention them? – 3PB

‘The dispute arose from the claimant’s back problems, which, it was agreed, made her disabled within the Equality Act 2010. She was unable to travel far and wanted to work mainly from home. This caused difficulty because her role, auditing the performance of National Health Service bodies, was “client facing” and required her to visit those bodies. She was eventually dismissed for reason of ill-health capability after an occupational health report and negotiations with her union representative. The respondent was concerned that she was not meeting her financial targets, i.e. the required amount of chargeable time billed to the respondent’s clients. These receipts from clients funded her salary. There were not enough clients within the short travelling distance from her home that she could manage.’

Full Story

3PB, 7th February 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Council-owned company defends unfair dismissal claim from ADHD sufferer – Local Government Lawyer

‘A refuse collector has lost his claim for disability discrimination against Bristol Waste, a wholly-owned operation of Bristol City Council.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 20th February 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

When are Article 8 rights engaged in the context of an unfair dismissal claim and how should the engagement of such rights be approached by the tribunal? – 3PB

‘The claimant was employed by the respondent from 1994 until November 2014 as a Probation Service Officer (“PSO”). In 2014 there was an incident at the claimant’s home involving the claimant, her then partner, and her daughter, who was then a teenager. It was alleged that the claimant had been violent towards her daughter, something she had always vehemently denied. Social Services became involved and her daughter was placed on the Child Protection Register (“CPR”).’

Full Story

3PB, 7th February 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Ethical veganism: a philosophical belief – 3PB

‘The Claimant, Mr Casamitjana, was dismissed from his role at the League Against Cruel Sports in April 2018 after disclosing to colleagues that the company’s pension funds were being invested ‘unethically’. This was considered by the Respondent to be contrary to a management instruction not to provide financial advice to his colleagues. The Claimant brought claims of indirect discrimination, direct discrimination/harassment and victimisation by reference to his belief in ethical veganism, and PIDA detriment and dismissal, and wrongful dismissal.’

Full Story

3PB, 7th February 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

EAT Applies Jhuti Principles to Uddin v London Borough of Ealing – Old Square Chambers

‘Do the principles set down by the Supreme Court decision in the landmark decision in Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti (in which Simon Gorton QC and Jack Mitchell acted for the Royal Mail) apply to the assessment of whether an employer acted reasonably in dismissing an employee for the purposes of s.98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996?’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, 17th February 2020

Source: www.oldsquare.co.uk

Case Comment: Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55, Part Two – UKSC Blog

‘There are a number of ways in which this judgment opens the door to arguments about its wider impact.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 17th February 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

Case Comment: Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti [2019] UKSC 55, Part One – UKSC Blog

‘If an employee is dismissed on bogus grounds invented by someone more senior than her in the business, that person’s true reason for acting as they did will be the real reason for the dismissal, even if the decision to dismiss was made by another person acting in good faith in reliance on the bogus grounds.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 17th February 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

Employees and child protection issues – Local Government Lawyer

‘The Employment Appeal Tribunal recently considered whether a probation service officer who failed to disclose a child protection issue was fairly dismissed. Ceri Fuller, Zoë Wigan and Hilary Larter analyse the outcome.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 14th February 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Court rejects LiP’s “indiscriminate attack” on legal expenses insurers – Litigation Futures

‘The High Court has struck out a claim by a litigant-in-person (LiP) who responded to the failure of her employment tribunal case by launching an “indiscriminate attack” against legal expenses insurers and regulators.’

Full Story

Litigation Futures, 30th January 2020

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Article 8 & Unfair Dismissal – January 2020 – Pallant Chambers

Posted January 28th, 2020 in human rights, news, privacy, probation, unfair dismissal by sally

‘Q v Secretary of State for Justice UKEAT/0120/19 was a recent case in which the Employment Appeal Tribunal looked at the application of the Article 8 in a conduct dismissal case.’

Full Story

Pallant Chambers, 23rd January 2020

Source: www.pallantchambers.co.uk

Gareth Price reviews the need for a detriment to take place within the “employment field”. – Parklane Plowden Chambers

Posted January 17th, 2020 in appeals, disclosure, employment, employment tribunals, news, unfair dismissal by sally

‘The Court of Appeal has considered an interesting argument regarding an employee who, ostensibly, made protected disclosures and allegedly suffered detriments as a result – but may not have done so within the ‘employment field’; Tiplady v. City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council [2019] EWCA Civ 2180.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden Chambers, 14th January 2020

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Ethical Veganism as a Protected Characteristic – St John’s Building

‘An employment tribunal has ruled that ethical veganism is a philosophical belief that is protected by law against discrimination. In Jordi Casamitjana v the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) JC complains of unfair dismissal having raised concerns with colleagues that its pension fund invested in companies involved in animal testing. The charity did not contest that ethical veganism should be protected but will argue at trial that JC was dismissed for gross misconduct.’

Full Story

St John's Buildings, 9th January 2020

Source: stjohnsbuildings.com

Weightmans entitled to fire worker over internet browsing, tribunal rules – Law Society’s Gazette

‘National firm Weightmans acted within the law to sack a long-serving staff member over her internet usage whilst at work, an employment tribunal has found.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 17th January 2020

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Case Law Update – ethical veganism protected as a philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010 – Parklane Plowden

‘Last week the long-awaited decision in the case of Casamitjana v League Against Cruel Sports was finally handed down by Employment Judge Postle in Norwich Employment Tribunal. The case had been listed for a Preliminary Hearing to determine whether ethical veganism constitutes a protected belief under the Equality Act 2010. The Equality Act 2010 does not provide express protection for ethical vegans, albeit that veganism is a philosophy which falls within the ambit of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.’

Full Story

Parklane Plowden, 10th January 2020

Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk

Is the prejudice of an investigating manager relevant to determining the propriety of a dismissal, even if the decision makers are not aware of and do not share that prejudice? – 12 King’s

‘In Cadent Gas Ltd v Singh [2019] UKEAT 0024/19/0810, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has considered whether the personal animus of a manager who had been heavily involved in a disciplinary investigation had tainted the dismissal process as a whole, even though the dismissing managers had not shared that animus. Furthermore, the EAT considered whether that manager’s prejudice towards the Claimant, informed by his trade union activities, could be attributed to the employer.’

Full Story

12 King's Bench Walk, 3rd January 2020

Source: www.12kbw.co.uk

Tribunal overturns unfair dismissal ruling against partner – Legal Futures

‘An employment tribunal has ruled that it was wrong to uphold an unfair dismissal claim against a partner in a law firm closed down by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 8th January 2020

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

“Minor error” dooms senior clerk’s unfair dismissal claim – Legal Futures

Posted January 7th, 2020 in barristers' clerks, limitations, news, unfair dismissal by sally

‘A senior clerk at a London barristers’ chambers cannot bring an unfair dismissal claim because of a “minor error” meaning that it was out of time.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 7th January 2020

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Ethical veganism is a protected belief, rules Employment Tribunal – UK Human Rights Blog

‘In what multiple commentators have hailed as a landmark legal case, Norwich Employment Tribunal found that the Claimant’s “ethical veganism” is a philosophical belief and therefore a protected characteristic for the purposes of section 10 of the Equality Act 2010 (“s.10”) following a preliminary hearing on 2nd and 3rd January 2020.’

Full Story

UK Human Rights Blog, 4th January 2020

Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com