header-logo header-logo

02 April 2015 / Ryan Clement
Issue: 7647 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Back to basics

Chapman v Simon is alive and kicking after 20 years, says Ryan Clement

As advocates in court, as well as in the employment tribunal, it is important to remain focused on what is being alleged by the claimant(s), what has been agreed as being the issues in the case (preferably from the outset of the hearing) and what evidence is needed in law to prove a case. In the heat of an adversarial exchange there is the temptation either to seek to prove or to disprove everything that is raised in witness statements/oral evidence irrespective of their relevance to the issues on which the tribunal has to decide. And, unfortunately, it is just not the advocates. We have seen cases where tribunals themselves have wrongly and/or mistakenly awarded claimants remedies in cases based on findings that were not in fact relevant to the complaint brought or pleaded.

Chapman v Simon

The Court of Appeal authority of Chapman and another (appellants) v Simon (respondent) [1994] IRLR 124 is still alive and kicking after 20 years. In

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll