Woolworths update: case to go to Court of Appeal
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision in USDAW v Ethel Austin Ltd (in administration); USDAW and anor etc — the Woolworths case — sent shockwaves through the legal and HR professions.
By way of a reminder, in this case the EAT decided that the words ‘at one establishment’ should be deleted from section 188 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
The effect of this decision being that employers must now calculate all their proposed redundancies over a 90-day period nationwide, regardless of the specific location of each redundancy when considering whether collective consultation obligations will apply…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Shoosmiths briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Shoosmiths
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Shoosmiths
The Court of Appeal has found in favour of a business tenant and decided that a periodic tenancy had not been created in the intervening period.
Careful drafting is usually required for restrictive covenants to be enforceable, although Prophet plc v Huggett provides the exception to the rule.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Compliance and corporate governance codes for large financial institutions will undoubtedly include provisions to regulate high pay in the future
There’s more to the ABS model than attracting the man in the street and procuring external investment. Partners at the big corporate firms, take note…