header-logo header-logo

13 June 2025 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8120 / Categories: Features , Employment , Whistleblowing , Tribunals
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 13 June 2025

222357
Ian Smith chews over a bad apple, part-time status, missing appeal documents & whistleblowing detriments
  • Part-time status: must it be the sole reason?
  • A more liberal approach to missing appeal documents.
  • Whistleblowing detriment: vicarious liability for agents.
  • Equal value claims and job evaluation studies: is there a ‘bad apple’ principle?

Two Court of Appeal cases in the last month are of particular importance on very different problems in current employment law—namely the requirement of causation in part-time worker cases, and the right approach to be taken to incomplete documentation in an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), in the light of a legislative change in 2023. In the case of the latter, it should finally determine the point but, for reasons explained below, the former may not be the last word.

In addition, two EAT cases are considered here, relating to vicarious liability of agents in whistleblowing law and the position of job evaluation schemes in equal value cases.

Part-time status

Augustine

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: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll