header-logo header-logo

10 July 2026 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8169 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals , Disciplinary&grievance procedures
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 10 July 2026

254472
© Getty images
Ian Smith tackles employers moving the goalposts & reflects on the dangers of fielding an unreliable defence
  • Four recent Employment Appeal Tribunal decisions have clarified key employment law principles, including summary dismissal, bonus entitlement, trade union dismissals and tribunal procedure.
  • The cases reinforce a fact-specific approach to employment disputes, while confirming limits on employer discretion and emphasising procedural fairness.

Even though the summer is upon us and the most important decision for employment lawyers is which of the now-seven volumes of the hard copy of Harvey to pack in their suitcase for light reading round the pool in Tuscany, these dog days have still seen four notable decisions of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) on some rather fundamental points of law. Not only that, but the first two concern essentially matters of common law as applied to employment law, namely whether an employee’s motives can be relevant when deciding on the legality of a summary dismissal, and when a bonus crystallises, so that the employer cannot then

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll