Discrimination

Four thorny cases of discrimination come under Ian Smith’s microscope in this week’s NLJ ‘Employment law brief’

Gender reassignment is a protected characteristic, but it’s not that simple, writes Sapandeep Singh Maini-Thompson

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) unlawfully failed to provide blind and visually impaired people with accessible communications about their benefits, the High Court has held

Where is the line between the right to freedom of religion & the lawful expression of that right? Nicholas Dobson examines a complex question for the Employment Appeal Tribunal

A recent employment appeal concerning a teacher dismissed for expressing gender-critical views on Facebook is a significant development in employment law because the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) focused on the ‘reason why’ question. In this week’s NLJ, Charles Pigott, professional support lawyer, Mills & Reeve, explains why the EAT’s approach ‘marks a significant development’ for discrimination claims, breaking new ground.

A recent Employment Appeal Tribunal ruling on gender-critical beliefs has brought human rights to the fore: Charles Pigott analyses a significant development for discrimination claims

Back to school already? Ian Smith sets out some instructive lessons from the courts on the definition of a worker, the conduct of disciplinary hearings, & the perils of making a mistake

Recent judgments have highlighted the interaction between abortion time limits, criminal law & human rights, as David Walbank KC explains

The overrepresentation of Black, Asian and minority ethnic solicitors in complaints about solicitors may be due to conscious and unconscious perceptions or expectations on the part of those making the complaints, a review has suggested

The dispute over football celebrity Gary Lineker’s tweets captured the public imagination and backfired spectacularly on the BBC, but what if Lineker had been an employee? In this week’s NLJ, Charles Pigott, professional support lawyer, Mills & Reeve, looks into whether employers have rights to restrict their employee’s tweets or other private expressions of opinion.