header-logo header-logo

14 October 2010 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7437 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Back to the future

The Equality Act is here, but we’d have liked more notice, says Ian Smith

It used to be fairly standard for governments to tell us when laws were going to come into force (along, often with important subsidiary rules) all of a couple of days before the commencement date.

We might have hoped that this now belonged to the BAD OLD DAYS (definition of which, please, on a postcard to the editor) but they seem to have indulged in an element of backsliding on the major commencement order for the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), which finally made its appearance two thirds of the way through September, for a commencement date of 1 October. We do now have it (No 4 Order SI 2010/2317) and it is of some complexity where certain transitional provisions are concerned (some of the most complex of which, bizarrely, concern hovercraft, which are obviously a hotbed of illegal discrimination).

Of greater interest politically are the provisions of the Act which are not brought into effect.

The old public

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
back-to-top-scroll