header-logo header-logo

27 July 2012 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7524 / Categories: Features , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

The early bird...

bird_4

Chris Bryden & Michael Salter discuss the correct approach to apportioning discrimination awards

In a previous article, the authors discussed the impact of the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s decision in Brennan and others v Sunderland City Council UKEAT/0286/11/SM (“An unsatisfactory state of affairs?”, NLJ, 22 June 2012, p 821). In this case, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) found that there was no jurisdiction for an employment tribunal to entertain claims for contributions between discriminating respondent parties. At the end of that article we posited that there was a risk that individual employee respondents could face when a substantial award has been made by the tribunal.

Real consequences

This potential risk has very real consequences for those advising claimants at the earliest stages of litigation. One of the authors has recently been involved in a case where the impact of Brennan was felt a few weeks after the ET1 was presented. In this matter, an employee had presented their ET1 without the assistance of a lawyer. The ET1 was,

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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