“Unlike the general power provided by CPR 44.3, the costs consequences of Pt 36 do not lie in the discretion of the court. The court must apply them unless it considers it “unjust” to do so.”
Hardwicke Chambers, 20th February 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“What’s the point of the TUPE? Other than terrorising HR professionals and inspiring books as good as this one, that is? Its essential function is simple: to protect the employment and the terms and conditions of employees affected by a change in the ownership of the undertaking they work in or (for now at least) by a change in the identity of the provider of a service. The eye-popping complexity for which TUPE disputes are famous arises from trying to apply that simple principle to the messy business that is real life employment. The CJEU is presently pondering one example of the conceptual difficulties that can be thrown up in Alemo-Herron and others v Parkwood Leisure Limited C-426/11 and Advocate General Cruz Villalon has just delivered his opinion.”
Employment Law Blog, 22nd February 2013
Source: www.employment11kbw.com
“Shereener Browne analyses the recent decision in T, R (on the application of) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester & Ors and its impact on employment law.”
Garden Court Chambers Blog, 18th February 2013
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
“The Government has published its response to the ‘Modern Workplaces’ consultation on the overhaul of family rights at work, including shared parental leave, extended flexible working and new rights for surrogate parents. Rachel Crasnow explains the issues.”
Cloisters, 17th January 2013
Source: www.cloisters.com
“Equality and Human Rights Commission has published new guidance today to help employers and employees deal with the expression of religion or belief at work and avoid conflict and costly court cases.”
14th February 2013
Source: www.equalityhumanrights.com
“The Court of Appeal has ruled that regulations under the Jobseekers Act 1995 were unlawful as not meeting the requirements of that statute.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 13th February 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“‘The scheme’ named in the Jobseeker’s Allowance (Employment, Skills and Enterprise Scheme) Regulations 2011 did not comply with the requirements of section 17A of the Jobseekers Act 1995 and was unlawful.”
WLR Daily, 12th February 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Tens of thousands of people with schizophrenia are being denied the chance to work because of ‘severe discrimination’, a report has found.”
The Independent, 11th February 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“There were some statistics that private equity pioneer Adrian Beecroft did not include in his highly controversial report on employment law published last year. The number of claims brought by employees in employment tribunals fell from 236,000 in 2009-10 to 186,000 in 2011-12. The number of claims for both sex and age discrimination has almost halved. And the median award for most types of claim remains low, at around £5,000 (two months’ average pay). Given that these figures relate to a period of acute economic turbulence, they are counterintuitive.”
Law Society’s Gazette, 28th January 2013
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
“Following today’s European Court of Human Rights judgment in Eweida and Others v the United Kingdom, David Renton analyses the how the fine balance between religious freedom and avoiding discrimination can be struck.”
Garden Court Chambers Blog. 15th January 2013
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
“It’s good that the ECHR clarified issues about freedom of religion in the UK. But they got it wrong in the case of Ladele.”
The Guardian, 17th January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Councils can expect the backing of the legal system if they insist that employees conduct civil partnerships.”
The Guardian, 16th January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The conclusion reached by the European court of human rights in Christian discrimination cases is no surprise but the principle is difficult to apply.”
The Guardian, 15th January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Nadia Eweida has succeeded in her claim that the UK breached her right to manifest her religion under article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Readers may remember that she worked for British Airways, and refused to abide by its uniform policy, insisting on wearing a cross visible to customers. By a majority of five to two (the dissenters including the Court’s British former President, Sir Nicolas Bratza), the judges of the European Court of Human Rights found that the English court that dismissed her religious discrimination and human rights claim at national level, the Court of Appeal, gave too much weight to BA’s corporate aims and not enough to Ms Eweida’s desire to manifest her religion by wearing her cross. In consequence, the UK breached its ‘positive obligation’ to protect her right to manifest her religion.”
Head of Legal, 15th January 2013
Source: www.headoflegal.com
“The Strasbourg Court has today [15 January] come up with something of a mixed message in relation to religion at work. They have voted that there is a right to manifest individual faith by wearing religious adornments but not by objecting to practices that are protected by anti-discrimination legislation.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 15th January 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“After seven years of legal appeals and accusations that Christians are being persecuted for their beliefs, the European court of human rights has ruled that a British Airways check-in operator should not have been prevented from wearing a cross at work.”
The Guardian, 15th January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A British Airways check-in worker’s right to express her religion was unfairly restricted when she was prevented from wearing a cross at work, the European court of human rights (ECHR) has ruled.”
The Guardian, 15th January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“John McCririck, the flamboyant racing pundit, has launched a £3 million age discrimination claim after he was dropped by Channel 4.”
Daily Telegraph, 9th January 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Enthusiasm for legal apprenticeships grew notably last year with several firms launching formal schemes. Not only are new Higher Apprenticeships in Legal Services due to launch in March, which are equivalent to the first year of a degree, but the government’s minister for skills, Matthew Hancock, announced in late December that it may be possible to enroll on apprenticeships equivalent to bachelors and masters degree level as early as this year.”
The Guardian, 9th January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025