header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 February 2023 / Simon Fennell
Issue: 8013 / Categories: Features , Employment , EU , Brexit , TUPE , Pensions
printer mail-detail

Employment law: a chance for change? (Pt 1)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
111195
Could the revocation of retained EU law provide the opportunity to iron out some headaches for practitioners? Simon Fennell sets out his employment law wish list
  • The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill provides the chance to amend those parts of employment law that cause the most headaches to practitioners.
  • This includes addressing the limitations and challenges of the TUPE Regulations.

Much has already been written about the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill and the potential impact that it could have on UK law. A good deal of the commentary has been directed towards the potential negative consequences, including how the numerous protections provided to employees by EU law might be removed and denied to future generations.

If you are not already aware, the Bill, if passed in its original form, means that all law that is derived from the UK’s membership of the EU will cease to have legal effect on 31 December 2023—the sunset date.

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Newcastle & North of England Law Society—Lesley Fairclough

Newcastle & North of England Law Society—Lesley Fairclough

Ward Hadaway partner becomes bicentennial president following regional merger

Devonshires—four promotions

Devonshires—four promotions

Firm promotes four senior associates to partner in annual round

Fieldfisher—John McElroy & Daniel Hayward

Fieldfisher—John McElroy & Daniel Hayward

Co-heads of dispute resolution practice appointed alongside partner promotions

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll