header-logo header-logo

11 May 2012
Issue: 7513 / Categories: Features , Civil way
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 11 May 2012

Back where we started & bankruptcy blows

BACK WHERE WE STARTED
Two years, six months, one year, two years with a small employer, two years with small and large employers and one year. Such have been the qualifying periods for making an unfair dismissal claim since the Industrial Relations Act 1971 invented the right. We have to report that the avalanche of legislation faced by employment lawyers was even more acute than we had thought (see NLJ) and that the catchingly entitled Unfair Dismissal and Statement of Reasons for Dismissal (Variation of Qualifying Period) Order 2012 (SI 2012/989) and the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (Tribunal Composition) Order 2012 (SI 2012/988), both of which were made on 30 March 2012, came into force on 6 April 2012. For employees who commenced employment on or after 6 April 2012, the qualifying period for an unfair dismissal claim and for the right to request a written statement of reasons for dismissal is raised to two years, which is where we came in. It is reckoned that

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll