Another Friday is upon us which means it is time for another case law update. A look at some recent judgments showed some very technical and convoluted cases which would frankly make for boring reading. Given this week’s easing of the lockdown restrictions was confusing enough – does anyone else feel that if Boris Johnson [...]
Greetings and welcome back to another weekly case law update. Last week we looked at harassment on several grounds including race, sex and sexual harassment. This week we are looking at settlement agreements and tribunal procedure regarding the admissibility of evidence. Long-time readers may remember the case of Bailey v Faithorn Farrell Timms LLP which […]
Hello and welcome back to your weekly case law update. Is it too early to start saying weekly again? We are now in back to back updates, after all! Last week, as an apology for being incommunicado, we had three cases for you concerning holiday pay, unlawful deductions and shared parental leave.
Our next case is another update concerning tribunal procedure (cheers/groans), this time focusing on the electrifying, high-octane world of limitation dates. For those of you who aren’t familiar with how limitation works for employment tribunal claims, much of the background law is summarised in our previous update of DHL v Fazackerley. The question in this [...]
Our next case concerns time limits and limitation dates for ET proceedings. We rarely cover procedural cases because they don’t often impact employers and are also full of dull jargon. However, this case could be of some use. After receiving the judgment in an Employment Tribunal claim, the losing party then has 42 days to […]
Hello and welcome back to your weekly case law update. Last week we looked at constructive dismissal and pay cuts. This week we are looking at a procedural case about bringing claims out of time. A few weeks ago, we covered a case about limitation dates and ACAS Early Conciliation. Not only do prospective Claimants […]
there is usually a juicy case and that is no exception in the EAT case of Innospec Ltd and Others v Mr Walker with the Interested Party being the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. This is a recently reported EAT sexual orientation discrimination case regarding occupational pensions. Mr Walker succeeded in his claim […]
Tribunals have a wide discretion to manage cases in accordance with the overriding objective – dealing with cases quickly, fairly and cost effectively. This case at the EAT is an example of a Tribunal going a step too far in trying to avoid a long hearing by limiting the number of allegations of discrimination the Claimant […]
Tribunals are loath to strike out claims without having heard the evidence unless the claim is obviously misconceived (with undisputed facts) or there have been persistent and flagrant breaches of Tribunal orders. Therefore in the overall majority of cases applying for a strike out is a waste of breath, costs and Tribunal resources. In this […]
I was at Tribunal yesterday and an interesting issue arose that I have never had before. We were listed for a full hearing but were told there was a panel member missing. We still had the Judge and one lay member who was the trade union representative. The hearing could proceed provided both parties consented […]
This case is a rather sad reminder that Tribunal claims can still be brought, even if the Claimant has died. The personal representatives of the deceased can still bring the claim to tribunal. The practical difficulty may be the lack of oral evidence that can be subjected to cross examination.
The EAT in COMPASS GROUP UK AND IRELAND LTD T/A SCOLAREST EDUCATIONAL FOODSERVICE v MR I WILSON has held that an Employer who failed to send in its ET3 response form within the 28 day time limit (and was therefore debarred from defending the claim), but later requested a review of the Tribunal’s decision to […]