Liability for abuse suffered by claimant place in private care home – Local Government Lawyer

‘Steven Ford QC analyses a ruling where, in the absence of fault, a local authority was not liable for sexual assaults committed by an employee of the private residential care home at which it placed the claimant. The relationship between the abusive employee and the placing authority was not akin to employment and the duty of care owed by the authority to the claimant was not non-delegable.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 16th April 2021

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Senior City lawyers want to continue working flexibly – or will leave – Legal Futures

Posted April 16th, 2021 in coronavirus, employment, flexible working, law firms, news, solicitors by tracey

‘The major City law firms are on notice that their big hitters want a permanent post-Covid change in work patterns or some will look to leave, new research has found.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 16th April 2021

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Solicitor unfairly dismissed for refusing Covid variation to contract – Legal Futures

‘A solicitor fired after refusing a demand to vary her contract so her firm could furlough her or reduce her wages to help it cope with the impact of Covid has won a claim for unfair dismissal.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 15th April 2021

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Keeping it Simple … A blog by Daphne Romney QC on the Asda Stores v Brierley UKSC decision – Cloisters

‘The Supreme Court has finally handed down judgment in Asda Stores Ltd v Brierley. But although it clarified and simplified the law concerning comparators at different establishments under s.79 EqA, it left other questions unresolved. Daphne Romney QC considers the judgment.’

Full Story

Cloisters, 26th March 2021

Source: www.cloisters.com

Covid-19 related absence dismissal was not automatically unfair – St Philips Barristers

‘The Leeds Employment Tribunal has recently determined one of the first dismissals arising out of the coronavirus pandemic in Rogers v Leeds Laser Cuttings Ltd [2021] No. 1803829/2020, writes Jonathan Gidney.’

Full Story

St Philips Chambers, 25th March 2021

Source: st-philips.com

“Lost years claims”: a rare re-opening following determination on damages – 3PB

‘This was a Court of Appeal decision following a hearing in December 2020. The parties to the Claim were the estate of the late Appellant, Michael Head and his former employer the Culver Heating Company Limited as Respondent.’

Full Story

3PB, 2nd March 2021

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Judgment on Asda Stores Ltd v Brierley and others [2021] UKSC 10 – case summary by Daisy van den Berg – Old Square Chambers

‘Judgment was handed down on 26 March 2021 by the Supreme Court in the case of Asda Stores Ltd v Brierley and others [2021] UKSC 10. It was held that employees working in Asda’s stores can use as comparators employees working in Asda’s depots for the purposes of an equal pay claim.’

Full Story

Old Square Chambers, 26th March 2021

Source: oldsquare.co.uk

Legal implications of ‘no jab, no job’ – Six Pump Court

Posted April 14th, 2021 in chambers articles, coronavirus, employment, news, vaccination by sally

‘Gordon Menzies considers the legal implications of ‘no jab, no job’ initiatives by employers and offers a guide to some of the relevant factors that should be taken into consideration when such measures are considered.’

Full Story

Six Pump Court, 6th April 2021

Source: www.6pumpcourt.co.uk

An erroneous decision to extend time under s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 – 3PB

‘The Honourable Mrs Justice Ellenbogen, sitting in the EAT, held that a tribunal had erred in extending time under s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 (“EqA 2010”), by failing to determine whether a claimant’s ignorance of his right to claim direct race discrimination was reasonable.’

Full Story

3PB, 2nd March 2021

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Cross – establishment comparisons are generally to be permitted save in exceptional circumstances: Asda Stores Ltd v. Brierley & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 44 – 3PB

‘This Equal Pay claim has been ongoing for some time already (since 2016) and is set to continue for some time yet. In short, the Supreme Court’s Judgment handed down 3 days ago (26th March 2021) is focused upon a narrow point, which whilst of importance and interest to both parties and their advisors, in no sense has brought closure to these proceedings which are likely to continue to attract media attention as the layers of equal value litigation unfold.’

Full Story

3PB, 29th March 2021

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

R.I.P Gig Economy? – 4 King’s Bench Walk

‘On February 19th, the Supreme Court dismissed Uber’s appeal upholding the decision of the Employment Tribunal: a ruling upheld both by the EAT and the Court of Appeal. Lord Leggatt’s judgment confirmed that the claimant Uber drivers were workers for the purposes of the Working Time Regulations, national minimum wage legislation, and the Employment Rights Act 1996. In a unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the Employment Tribunal to determine the claims on their merits.’

Full Story

4 King's Bench Walk, 4th March 2021

Source: www.4kbw.co.uk

Protected acts: beware a cautious approach – 3PB

‘R indicated that it wanted to arrange a Christmas dinner, and proposed a date for it. No objections were raised. Hotels and planes were consequently booked. Thereafter C (and a co-worker) indicated that the planned date did not suit them. R considered the matter but declined to change the date, various arrangements having already been made.’

Full Story

3PB, 2nd March 2021

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

After Uber: Purposive Interpretation and the Future of Contract – by Joe Atkinson and Hitesh Dhorajiwala – UK Labour Law

Posted April 1st, 2021 in contract of employment, employment, interpretation, news, Supreme Court, taxis by tracey

‘The Uber BV v Aslam [2021] UKSC 5 (“Uber (SC)”) judgment from the Supreme Court represents the final chapter in the long-running saga of determining the employment status of drivers who provided trips to passengers via the Uber app. As highlighted by Valerio De Stefano, the finding that the drivers must be classed as workers is part of a wider trend of decisions rejecting arguments that platform workers fall outside the regulatory scope of employment law. This blog considers key aspects of the Supreme Court’s reasoning, relating to the “purposive approach” and the role of contractual documentation in determining employment status, as well as some of the practical consequences of the judgment for workers.’

Full Story

UK Labour Law, 1st April 2021

Source: uklabourlawblog.com

Tribunal: Law firm’s part-time FD was worker, not self-employed – Legal Futures

‘An accountant who acted as a law firm’s part-time finance director through a company was a worker and not self-employed, even though he had another client, an employment tribunal has ruled.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 29th March 2021

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Shrewsbury 24: how industrial action led to 47-year fight for justice – The Guardian

‘The industrial action that led to the convictions of union activists and a 47-year campaign to clear their names took place as Edward Heath’s Conservative government sought to weaken the economic power of trade unions.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 23rd March 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

Shrewsbury 24: court of appeal overturns 1970s picketing convictions – The Guardian

‘Court of appeal judges have overturned the criminal convictions of a group of trade unionists, including the actor Ricky Tomlinson, after a campaign lasting more than four decades.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 23rd March 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

Supreme Court: Carers not entitled to minimum wage when asleep – Law Society’s Gazette

‘Care workers who “sleep-in” are not entitled to the national minimum wage when they are in bed, the Supreme Court has ruled.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 19th March 2021

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Clapham vigil policing investigator is suing Home Office for sex and race bias – The Guardian

‘The investigator helping coordinate the official inquiry into the Metropolitan police’s handling of the Sarah Everard vigil and concerns over women’s safety is suing the Home Office for sex discrimination over claims that he has been penalised for being a “white man”, the Observer can reveal.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 21st March 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

‘A lot are sceptical’: Uber drivers’ cautious welcome over worker status – The Guardian

‘On Wednesday Uber, the taxi hailing app, began offering 70,000 UK drivers a minimum hourly wage, holiday pay and pensions after years of legal battles.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 18th March 2021

Source: www.theguardian.com

Does a Compulsory Retirement Age Infringe Human Rights Law? – by Hugh Collins – UK Labour Law Blog

‘An employer’s compulsory retirement scheme requires the dismissal of an employee for no other reason than the employee has attained a specified retirement age. The retirement age may be fixed in the terms of the contract of employment, a staff handbook, a collective agreement, or other regulations that determine the rules governing a particular retirement age. Although compulsory retirement used to be lawful, since 2011 the position in the United Kingdom (UK) is that an employee dismissed in accordance with an employer’s policy of a compulsory retirement age can bring a claim either for unfair dismissal under the Employment Rights Act 1996 or (for workers as well as employees) for age discrimination under the Equality Act 2010. Following Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes [2012] UKSC 16, an employer can justify the age discrimination of a compulsory retirement age as a proportionate measure in pursuit of a legitimate aim, such as preserving the promotion prospects of younger staff or the avoidance of intrusive surveillance of the job performance of older staff.’

Full Story

UK Labour Law Blog, 17th March 2021

Source: uklabourlawblog.com