header-logo header-logo

19 May 2016 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7699 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 19 May 2016

nlj_7699_smith

Ian Smith reports on cases concerning important points of very basic common law

All professionals are now familiar with that modern heresy of being required to write reports, appraisals, policies or (god help us) mission statements that in essence have to be written to prove that they have indeed been written, not for anyone actually to read them. In fact, a certain amount of innocent amusement can be taken by deliberately putting into such an exercise elements of obvious nonsense in order to prove that no-one has ever read it. Your humble author’s favourite example occurred when, shortly before early retirement from the university (and therefore demob happy) I was required to write a resume of my tort course, starting off with the dreaded “aims and objectives”. Under “aims” I put: “To teach the law of tort” and under “objectives” I put: “To have taught the law of tort”. This I considered to be a particularly apposite answer, but of course no-one ever read it.

All of this may be relatively harmless,

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: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll