header-logo header-logo

08 December 2023 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8052 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 8 December 2023

150651
Ian Smith (not pictured) sees out the year with some employment bangers
  • Casual workers—Art 11 relevant?
  • Partners are not employees of a business engaging the partnership.
  • Does use of employer’s internal procedures constitute affirmation of contract?

The key development last month was the awaited decision of the Supreme Court in the Deliveroo case. The decision of the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) that the riders were not workers in domestic law was not being challenged by this stage, reliance being placed instead on Art 11 of the European Convention. However, the result shows that, as in the past, arguments about the application of that article to the specific context of trade union rights can be one step forward and two steps back. The other two cases considered here concern two well-worn employment law conundrums (conundra?)—the legal position of partners and whether use of an employer’s internal procedures by a departing employee can ever be thrown back at them by the respondent employer as constituting affirmation of contract. The former is interesting

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll