header-logo header-logo

16 December 2022 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8007 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals , TUPE , Disciplinary&grievance procedures
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 16 December 2022

104840
Before he shoots off for Christmas duties, Ian Smith unwraps some of the latest gifts from the Employment Appeal Tribunal & Court of Appeal
  • Termination by the employer; the effect of a successful appeal.
  • The duty to mitigate loss in a whistleblowing case.
  • TUPE and service provision changes; the activities must remain fundamentally the same.
  • Collective agreements are not subject to the equitable remedy of rectification.

Of the four cases considered in this brief (three in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) and one in the Court of Appeal), the first two concern interesting sub-issues in areas of otherwise quite settled law; the third is a useful factual example of one of the key requirements for there to be a ‘service provision change’ in TUPE law; and in the fourth, the Court of Appeal has rectified an ‘adventurous’ first-instance decision on (you’ve guessed it) rectification.

The effect of successful appeals

The position of an employee faced with dismissal who uses an internal appeal system raises

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

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Global finance group strengthened by returning partner in London

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll