header-logo header-logo

28 June 2024 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8077 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 28 June 2024

179421
Next week’s election may result in changes to employment law, but the existing law continues to present novel issues of interpretation, says Ian Smith
  • Case one considers whistleblowing detriment and establishing the reason in an organisation.
  • Case two is about considering alternative employment in a medical incapability case.
  • Case three contains an important point about the liability of employees in a discrimination case.

With much emphasis, as I write, on possible new employment laws after the election, and speculation as to what Labour would do whether within the first 100 days or not (answers please on a postcard to the editor), it is sobering to be reminded that the existing law can still throw up novel issues of interpretation.

The first case considered this month shows this in spades. It concerns the question of how an organisation can fall foul of the law against imposing detriments (other than dismissal) on an employee. Some of this hinges on a legislative change made 11 years ago but only now coming to the

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