header-logo header-logo

14 June 2007 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7277 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 15 June 2007

The dismissal conundrum >>
The rules on “without prejudice” privilege >>
Maternity absentee returning to the “same job” >>

Three very different areas of employment law are worthy of mention this month. The first is a very old conundrum on the meaning of “dismissal”. The second is the application in employment law of the rules on “without prejudice” privilege. The third is the meaning of a maternity absentee returning to the “same job”, on which curiously we have never before had a decision at appellate level.

When is it a dismissal?

The question of how an employment terminated—dismissal or resignation?—was subject to much discussion in early case law during the Cretaceous Period of employment law. Did he jump or was he pushed? On a mundane level, this can arise where all that happens is that the parties swear mightily at each other and part; in such a case, the test, in legal language, is who was the f-offor and who was the f-offee. There is, however, an inherently more difficult version

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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll