header-logo header-logo

Employment law brief: 13 June 2025

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll