header-logo header-logo

27 March 2015
Issue: 7646 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Employment

Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd and another [2015] UKSC 17, [2015] All ER (D) 185 (Mar)

The appellant’s husband was found by the second respondent employer to have committed suicide, depriving her of the death benefits provided for in his employment contract. The Supreme Court held that a decision that an employee had committed suicide was not a rational or reasonable decision, unless the employer had had it clearly in mind that suicide was such an improbability that cogent evidence was required to form the positive opinion that it had taken place. In the present case, there was no sufficiently cogent evidence to justify the respondents in forming the positive opinion that the husband had committed suicide.

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

Anthony Collins—William Hallett & Lorna Scully

Anthony Collins—William Hallett & Lorna Scully

Anthony Collins hires two talented legal directors

Switalskis—five appointments

Switalskis—five appointments

Firm expands national abuse compensation team

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

IP firm announces new partners and senior promotions across UK offices

NEWS
A High Court ruling has sent a jolt through the legal profession after a newly qualified solicitor used an internal AI tool to produce court correspondence containing a fabricated legal citation
A significant data privacy ruling has clarified what counts as valid consent under UK data protection law
Executors may be overlooking billions of pounds in estate assets hidden in forgotten investments and misplaced share certificates
Britain’s booming non-surgical cosmetics market is operating in what some critics describe as a regulatory ‘Wild West’
Family contact disputes are becoming an increasingly prominent feature of Court of Protection litigation
back-to-top-scroll