header-logo header-logo

14 April 2021 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7928 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 16 April 2021

45603
After a busy month for the Supreme Court, Ian Smith examines the implications for employment law & the impact on other cases in the pipeline
  • Sleep-in carers and the national minimum wage.
  • Common terms of employment in supermarket equal pay case.
  • Pimlico Plumbers claimant loses on time limitation.

We have had, in the last month, two Supreme Court judgments on important employment law topics, for which we have been waiting for some considerable time. The first regularises and simplifies the hitherto-complicated question of whether sleep-in carers can ever claim payment on the national minimum wage (NMW) scales for time asleep (answer: no). The second decides whether supermarket retail assistants in shops (female) can compare their pay with distribution workers in depots (male) for the purposes of an equal value claim (answer: yes). One thing they have in common is that both potentially involved many employers beyond the individual respondents and large amounts of money. The third case considered here was not in the Supreme Court, but followed

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: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll