header-logo header-logo

Employment law brief: 12 March 2015

12 March 2015 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7644 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail
nlj_7644_smith

Ian Smith reflects upon the impact of recent employment law developments

First instance decisions need to be treated with some reserve as authorities, even in employment law, but two this month deserve consideration on grounds of law, not fact. The first shows that it may be possible for employees annoyed by a unilateral change in their contracts to seek a remedy by way of declaratory relief; this has always been possible but rarely used and the first case this month shows it might be useful where the changes do not involve any immediate, quantifiable, loss of wages. The second concerns setting up in competition with the employer and raised three issues of law, one of which (unusually in this context) points out an easily-overlooked trap for an employee when relying on the idea of constructive dismissal in a common law case. Two Court of Appeal decisions are then considered. The first arose from the eternal problem of employment status and was the second time this protracted litigation had been there. The

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

NLJ Career Profile: Francis Ho, City of London Law Society

NLJ Career Profile: Francis Ho, City of London Law Society

Francis Ho, Charles Russell Speechlys partner, was recently appointed chair of the Construction Law Committee of the City of London Law Society. He discusses the challenges of learning to lead, the importance of professional ethics, and the power of the written word, withNLJ

Slater Heelis—Chester office

Slater Heelis—Chester office

North West presence strengthened with Chester office launch

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Firm grows commercial disputes expertise with partner promotion

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
back-to-top-scroll