header-logo header-logo

11 April 2014 / Ian Smith
Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 11 April 2014

Ian Smith considers the latest employment law developments

The last month has seen two important legislative developments now in the pipe line. Also, two Court of Appeal decisions have clarified points of interpretation on the “ancillary provisions” part of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). They are welcome for at least two reasons: (i) these are points of law that were causing some uncertainty; and (i) they show that we are at last now having case law reach us under EqA 2010 rather than the seven previous pieces of legislation (on equal pay, sex, race, disability, religion/belief, sexual orientation and age), which are finally about to be removed from Harvey after a mere four transitional years (!). Lastly, mention is made of an Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision on internal disciplinary appeals which looks odd at first, is in fact quite logical but may need careful handling as a precedent.

Legislative changes in force from 6 April

1) Early conciliation and financial penalties on employers

The Commencement (No 5) Order (SI 2014/253) 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

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
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
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
back-to-top-scroll