header-logo header-logo

22 August 2014 / Ian Smith
Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 22 August 2014

Ian Smith considers the latest employment law developments

There can be a tendency for employers conducting a disciplinary hearing to think that, once it has been regularly convened, they can then reach any result that they think reasonable and/or necessary. The first case reported this month shows that that will not always be the case and that an employer must still be alive to what is and is not within its powers. The other four cases come into two groups, concerning well-worn issues of the status of directors/shareholders and the validity of restraint of trade clauses.

Higher penalty possible on appeal?

Years ago, the then Lord Chief Justice Lord Goddard evolved what many exasperated practitioners might still see as a rather neat way to deal with unmeritorious criminal appeals—if you appealed against a sentence of three years and failed, you might well be sent away with six. If memory serves, this had to be stopped by legislation. Can such a result occur now in employment law in a misconduct case? The decision

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll