header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Employment law brief: 13 December 2024

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
13 December 2024 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8098 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail
201000
Did the Supreme Court ask for a can of worms for Christmas? Ian Smith wraps up the year in employment law with some final twists & turns
  • Check-off of union dues; discontinuance by employer.
  • Whether collective agreements can be rectified.
  • Pre-termination negotiations; the meaning of ‘improper behaviour’.

Supreme Court decisions on employment law are not exactly common, but in the October brief (NLJ, 18 October, pp9-10) we saw one on the meaning of a ‘permanent’ contractual provision (Tesco Stores Ltd v Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers and others [2024] UKSC 28, [2024] All ER (D) 24 (Sep)), and we now have two more. The first concerned attempts by government departments to discontinue union dues check-off arrangements, and the second dealt with whether a collective agreement can be rectified in equity. Interestingly, they both raised issues surrounding one of the oldest rules in our employment law—namely that collective agreements are not legally enforceable. In addition, an important Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) pronouncement

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Clarke Willmott—Declan Goodwin & Elinor Owen

Clarke Willmott—Declan Goodwin & Elinor Owen

Corporate and commercial teams in Cardiff boosted by dual partner hire

Hill Dickinson—Joz Coetzer & Marc Naidoo

Hill Dickinson—Joz Coetzer & Marc Naidoo

London hires to lead UK launch of international finance team

Switalskis—11 promotions

Switalskis—11 promotions

Firm marks start of year with firmwide promotions round

NEWS
Read All
LSB marks Mazur homework
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
NLJ this week: Next gen wealth planning meets modern family reality
The next generation is inheriting more than assets—it is inheriting complexity. Writing in NLJ this week, experts from Penningtons Manches Cooper chart how global mobility, blended families and evolving values are reshaping private wealth advice
NLJ this week: Game on as AI reshapes sport
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming sport, from recruitment and training to officiating and fan engagement. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dr Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys at Law explains how AI now influences everything from injury prevention to tactical decisions, with clubs using tools such as ‘TacticAI’ to gain competitive edges
NLJ this week: Stuck in the past?
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
NLJ this week: No automatic bar on ‘user damages’
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll