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? In Rai v Legal & General Assurance Society [2015] EWHC 170, the English High Court decided that coverage was not available under an employee benefits insurance policy due to the operation of an exclusion in...more
What happened? In the recent case of Land Registry v Houghton the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that an employer had discriminated against disabled employees by operating a bonus scheme which disqualified employees...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 Sefton Borough Council v Wainwright, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that employers must offer a woman on maternity leave a suitable alternative vacancy when they first become aware that her role is redundant or...more
What happened?
The Shared Parental Leave Regulations 2014 came into force on 1 December 2014 and will apply to children whose expected week of birth or placement for adoption is on or after 5 April 2015. The...more
We recently reported on the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s (EAT) important decision on the calculation of holiday pay. This decision established that payments in respect of “non-guaranteed overtime” must be taken into account...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 Creditsights Ltd v Dhunna the Court of Appeal restored an employment judge’s decision that the employment tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear claims brought by an employee working abroad. Mr Dhunna was employed by...more
What happened?
In Sunrise Brokers LLP v Rodgers, the High Court decided that an employer could refuse to allow an employee to resign in breach of contract and instead hold him to the terms of his contract. This meant...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
In Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes, the EAT decided that a partnership's mandatory retirement age (MRA) of 65 for partners was a proportionate means of achieving the partnership's legitimate aims of workforce planning and...more
In Clyde & Co LLP v Bates van Winkelhof, the Supreme Court decided that a member of an LLP (who was also a full equity partner) was a “worker” for the purposes of whistleblowing legislation. Although the judgment does not...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
What happened?
In Lock v British Gas Trading Limited, the ECJ decided that where an employee's remuneration includes commission, the employee's holiday pay should include the commission that would have been generated...more
What happened?
In Punjab National Bank (International) Ltd and others v Gosain, the EAT decided that covert recordings made by an employee of public and private discussions at her disciplinary and grievance hearings...more
What happened?
An employee who claims discrimination is protected against victimisation by the employer, which means that the employee has the right not to be treated less favourably by the employer because of the fact...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
In Norbrook Laboratories (GB) Ltd v Shaw, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decided that three emails from a manager raising concerns about the dangers of driving in snow amounted to a ‘qualifying disclosure’, thereby...more
What happened?
In Gallop v Newport City Council, the Court of Appeal decided that the employer should not have relied on an occupational health advisor’s unsupported statement that an employee was not disabled for the...more
What happened?
In East England Schools CIC (trading as 4myschools) v Palmer, 4myschools, an education recruitment company, claimed that one of its former employees had breached her restrictive covenants by soliciting...more
Recent surveys have shown that companies of all sizes are optimistic about their ability to expand and create jobs in 2014. With business confidence said to be at its highest since 1994, now is a good time for employers to...more