header-logo header-logo

11 November 2020 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7910 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 13 November 2020

31566
After a quiet few weeks, Ian Smith breaks the silence & tackles a Polkey reduction & the meaning of ‘because of’...

In brief

  • Constructive dismissal; communicating by conduct.
  • ACAS uplift not applicable to whistleblowing cases.
  • Applying a Polkey reduction to loss of statutory rights.
  • Causation in discrimination cases—the meaning of ‘because of’.

Things on the employment law front have been rather quiet for the last few weeks. At the time of writing we are still awaiting the publication of two Supreme Court decisions (already heard) of major importance, namely in the Uber litigation on employment/worker status in gig economy cases and the Royal Mencap case which will hopefully square the circle on when the national minimum wage applies to on-call/living in carers. Both have economic implications beyond their purely legal significance. In the meantime, we have had three EAT cases reported last month on communicating acceptance of employer repudiation by conduct, applying a Polkey (Polkey v A E Dayton Services Ltd [1987] 3 All ER 974)

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
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
The Environment Agency can prosecute offences beyond environmental legislation where proceedings support its statutory functions, the Divisional Court has confirmed
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
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
back-to-top-scroll