header-logo header-logo

11 November 2016
Issue: 7722 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Employment

Bailey v Faithorn Farrell Timms LLP UKEAT/0025/16/RN, [2016] All ER (D) 204 (Jun)

The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in allowing the employer’s appeal and the employee’s cross-appeal, in part, in respect of a claim for constructive unfair dismissal and indirect sex discrimination, ruled on the admissibility of evidence in employment tribunal (the tribunal) proceedings. It held, among other things, that the tribunal had erred it its approach to the principle of admissibility in respect of without prejudice negotiations by wrongly eliding the approach to s 111A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 with that of without prejudice privilege. Section 111A of the Act had to be read on its own terms and did not import the case law underpinning common law without prejudice privilege.

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
The controversial Mazur ruling, which caused widespread uncertainty about the role of non-solicitors in litigation work, has been overturned on appeal
Two landmark social media cases in the US could influence social media regulation in the UK, lawyers predict
Barristers have urged the government to set up Nightingale-style specialist courts, with jury trials, to prioritise rape, sexual assault and domestic abuse trials
Victims of violent crimes who suffer life-changing injuries receive less than half the financial support today than those in the 1990s, according to a senior personal injury lawyer
Rising numbers of cases, an increase in litigants in person and an overall lack of investment is piling pressure on the family court, the Law Society has warned
back-to-top-scroll