header-logo header-logo

17 March 2016 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7691 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 17 March 2016

Ian Smith considers developments in some well-worn difficult areas of the law

A few years ago Judge Clark started a judgment on redundancy payments by saying that it is odd that important points of interpretation still arise on the legislation here, but commented that on the other hand it has only been in existence since 1965 and one must not expect miracles. The decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) under Langstaff P in the first case considered in this brief shows the truth behind that typically pithy remark because it finally settles a point on lay-offs in redundancy law that has been uncertain since 1984. The second and third cases also concerned well-worn areas of difficulty in individual employment law, namely termination by mutual agreement (negating a “dismissal”) and the circumstances in which the parties can agree to vary what was originally the “effective date of termination” (EDT) of a dismissal. While not actually resolving all the possible conflicts in their areas, these decisions of Judge Eady do show the way the wind

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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
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
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
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
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
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
back-to-top-scroll