header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
09 July 2020 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7894 / Categories: Features , Employment , Discrimination
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 9 July 2020

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
23823
Ian Smith walks the line of three recent employment cases

In brief

  • Dismiss all and invite reapplications: not a panacea?
  • The limits of marriage/civil partnership discrimination.
  • The relationship between discrimination arising from disability and unfair dismissal.

There is something of a theme to the three cases considered in this month’s Brief, in that they all concern borderlines and the drawing of legal lines—(1) the distinction between reorganisation and redundancy, (2) where to draw the boundary of the legal protection against discrimination on the grounds of marriage and (3) how the laws on unfair dismissal and discrimination arising from disability interrelate in a case of dismissal because of disability-related incapability.

Dismiss & reapply

The decision in Gwynedd Council v Barratt UKEAT/0206/18explores a difficult distinction in redundancy unfair dismissal law between classic cases of selection from a pool on the one hand and the modern tactic of dismissing all and inviting them to apply for the jobs available. This ultimately raises the basic question:

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
Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
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
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
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
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
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
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll