header-logo header-logo

Employment law brief: 15 November 2024

15 November 2024 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8094 / Categories: Features , Employment , Human rights , Discrimination , Harassment
printer mail-detail
196802
Ian Smith combs through four cases addressing important issues of interpretation…including the reach of sexual harassment law
  • Whistleblowing detriment: a question of timing
  • Redundancy consultation: how collective and individual fit together.
  • Maternity leave & redundancy protection—the meaning of suitable alternative vacancy.
  • Harassment related to the prohibited ground.

The four cases considered here all address important issues of interpretation, relating to when a protected disclosure can be made, how collective and individual consultations fit together in unfair redundancy cases (especially in non-union establishments), the meaning of ‘suitable available vacancy’ in the laws protecting those on maternity leave, and the reach of sexual harassment law. The last is of particular note on its facts because it concerned one man insulting another in a way that related to the protected characteristic of sex. It shows that, as so often, the matter is resolved by logical statutory interpretation, however counter-intuitive the result may seem at first.

Whistleblowing detriment

Most of this appeal in MacLennan v The British Psychological Society [2024]

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll