header-logo header-logo

12 July 2007 / Elliot Gold , Alastair Hodge
Issue: 7281 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Coming off the rails

Flaws in statutory grievance and disciplinary procedures mean cases may have to be reheard, say Alastair Hodge and Elliot Gold

Lawyers and judges, one presumes, take the train just like everyone else. So we should all know how complicated and awkward the ticket system can be. It is easy to know where one wants to go. Finding the right ticket to ride, however, can be another matter. With this thought in mind, Parliament, in its wisdom, appears to have brought the same simplicity and elegance to the employment tribunals in the form of the statutory grievance and disciplinary procedures. We all know that a claimant wants to take the train to the tribunal. The problem, however, is which of the various types of ticket they have to purchase. And also, whether the government is trying to price them off the trains altogether.

Lawrence v Prison Service
 

In Lawrence v Prison Service [2007] UKEAT/630/06, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) started its judgment by declaring that the appeal raised “yet again a problem

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll