A recent article “Blowing in the wind” published in NLJ on 13 May 2016 (166 NLJ 7698 p 8) contained an inaccurate précis of Smith v Metropolitan University. The summary should have read: “Smith v London Metropolitan University [2011] IRLR 884, [2011] All ER (D) 19 (Sep) held that a university lecturer had not made protected disclosures under s 47 B (1) of ERA 1996 because grievances that she had raised about being asked to perform duties outside the scope of her contract, in the EAT’s opinion, disclosed no breach of a legal obligation (following Cavendish Munro) and in any event were not the reason for the dismissal. However, the EAT did hold that the ET had made an error in saying that the claimant was obliged to perform such duties.” Online versions have been updated to reflect this. With apologies and thanks to Dr Smith.
17 June 2016
Correction
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok
Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok
Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon
Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise
Twenty Essex—Thomas Hibbs, Jack Hollingworth & Sam Pearce
Three new tenants join Twenty Essex
NEWS
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application
Consumer credit law is heading for its biggest shake-up in 50 years, with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 set to yield much of its detailed statutory machinery to FCA rules
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
