header-logo header-logo

20 January 2023 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8009 / Categories: Features , Employment , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Covid-19
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 20 January 2023

107047
Ian Smith is back with a bang, rounding up the latest employment updates including COVID fears in the workplace & claims submitted one day out of time
  • Health and safety protection: unfair dismissal and COVID fears.
  • Applying the just and equitable extension of time.
  • Problems with ruling on admissibility of evidence at a preliminary stage.

Just before the Christmas break, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in a case that had been awaited by employment lawyers, concerning the operation of a potentially relevant piece of legislation in COVID-related cases. Ultimately the question was whether an employee dismissed for refusing to return to work for fear of infection could claim the protection of the special unfair dismissal provisions on dismissal for health and safety-connected reasons. We had already had of course the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision (the first at appellate level), but it was possible to argue that that decision was largely on factual issues, leaving much to be examined in more detail.

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll