- Litigation / Dispute Resolution (53)
- Company/Commercial (17)
- Corporate (6)
- Regulatory and compliance (3)
- Banking / Finance (2)
- Environment (2)
- Family (2)
- Healthcare (2)
- Pensions (2)
- Crime (1)
- Energy (1)
- Financial services (1)
- Human Rights (1)
- Intellectual Property (1)
- Media/Entertainment/Sport (1)
- Personal Injury (1)
- Public Sector/Local Authority (1)
- Tax (1)
Sort By: Newest first | Oldest first
The new compensation limits for dismissals taking place on or after 6 April 2014 have been published.
Ever since the Equality Act came in, there has been uncertainty as to whether it covers post-employment victimisation.
The EAT had to decide two main issues: had the claimant made a ‘disclosure’? Did he suffer detriment as a result of that?
The claimant in The Solicitors Regulation Authority v Mitchell had agreed with her employers that she could work from home two days each week to facilitate childcare arrangements.
A section in last year’s Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act is coming into force for claims started on or after 6 April.
A small fire broke out in a children’s nursery. The claimant was accused of having tried to start the fire and was dismissed for gross misconduct.
The EAT has given a judgment ordering an employer to repay to the employee the EAT fees that he incurred in bringing an appeal.
From 6 May 2014, claimants will only be able to lodge a claim with the Employment Tribunal if they have first referred a complaint to ACAS for early conciliation.
An employer is liable not only for the discriminatory acts of its own employees, but may also be liable as principal for discriminatory acts carried out by its agents.
When the claimant in Vision Events (UK) Ltd v Paterson was made redundant, he asked to be paid for in excess of 1,000 hours of flexitime.
For a dismissal to be fair, the employer must show that the reason for dismissal or, if more than one, the principal reason, is one of the categories of potentially fair reason under the legislation.
The claimants transferred to the employer, after which the college employed some 3,500 staff on 37 different sets of terms and conditions of employment providing offender learning services.
The government has confirmed that the extension of the right to request flexible working to all employees will now not be available from 6 April.
The claimant in this case was dismissed and relied on three emails as being protected disclosures in a claim of automatic unfair dismissal.
On 5 February 2014, the National Labor Relations Board voted 3–2 to reissue a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend its representation election procedures.
Under a civil service voluntary exit scheme, employees aged 60 or over had their severance compensation capped at six months’ pay.
Employment News — 27 January 2014: in dispute? ‘Without prejudice’ settlement negotiations were inadmissible
‘Without prejudice’ communications made for the purpose of a genuine attempt to compromise an existing dispute cannot, generally speaking, be put before the court as evidence.
Employment News — 27 January 2014: no deal: claimant’s rejection of offer to settle did not justify costs award
The claimant was dismissed from her job as a bank branch manager on conduct grounds, following an incident where she had left the branch safe open.
Employment News — 27 January 2014: bare necessities: implied contract between agency worker and client was not necessary
The claimant in Smith v Carillion (JM) Ltd worked in the construction industry through an employment agency.
As the Acas code on disciplinary procedures makes clear, even if an employee is charged with a criminal offence, that is not normally in itself reason for disciplinary action.