header-logo header-logo

20 January 2011 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 7449 / Categories: Features , Tribunals , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Employment
printer mail-detail

An early exit

Charles Pigott reports on why the Woodcock appeal failed to fly

An The origins of the dispute in Woodcock v Cumbria Primary Care Trust UKEAT/0489/09 go back to the merger of a number of primary care trusts (PCTs) in 2006, resulting in a reduction in the number of chief executive posts. Mr Woodcock, who had held such a position under the old structure, was in the process of applying for one of the new posts when he was seconded to the newly created strategic health authority (SHA) for whole of the North West.

In July 2006 he was told that his application for a chief executive’s post in the new structure had been unsuccessful. He remained on secondment doing a number of projects for the SHA, although his salary continued to be paid by the new Cumbria PCT, to which his employment had been transferred as part of the reorganisation. By early 2007 at the latest, given that he had still not found alternative employment, it would have been appropriate for the

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