In Federacion de Servicios de Comisiones Obreras (CCOO) v Deutsche Bank SAE (C-55/18), the European Court of Justice (ECJ) decided that, in order to comply with the provisions of the EU Working Time Directive (the Directive)...more
What happened? In Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc, the Supreme Court decided that the employer was vicariously liable for an employee’s assault on a customer. Mr Mohamud, a man of Somali origin, went into a Morrisons...more
What happened? Under the Equality Act 2010, employers are required to make reasonable adjustments where they know, or "ought reasonably to know", that an employee has a disability. This is commonly referred to as actual or...more
What happened?
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) recently decided that an Australian citizen, working remotely from Australia for a British company, was entitled to bring unfair dismissal and whistleblowing claims...more
What happened? In Game Retail Ltd v Laws, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decided that an employer had acted reasonably when dismissing an employee for use of his personal Twitter account for non-work related but...more
What happened?
In Dyer v London Ambulance NHS Trust, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decided that no reasonable adjustment could have been made for an employee who had a potentially life-threatening sensitivity to...more
In a landmark decision, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has decided that payments in respect of “non-guaranteed overtime”, which is overtime that an employer is not required to offer, but an employee is required to work...more
In London Borough of Southwark v Charles, the EAT decided that the London Borough of Southwark (the "Borough") had failed in its duty to make reasonable adjustments when it refused to assess by other less formal means the...more
What happened?
In Hershaw v Sheffield City Council, the EAT decided that a letter increasing employees' pay was legally binding on the employer, even though the consultant who sent it had no authority to make a...more
What happened?
In Reynolds v CLFIS (UK) Limited, the EAT decided that in discrimination cases, the mental processes of all employees who have significantly influenced the alleged discriminatory decision are relevant,...more
In Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc, the Court of Appeal decided that the employer was not vicariously liable for an employee’s assault on a customer. The fact that the employee was given exposure to customers as part...more