header-logo header-logo

13 August 2021 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7945 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 13 August 2021

54932
Ian Smith signs off from his beach hut with an eclectic mix of cases involving suspicion, doubt, disbelief & enforcement
  • Establishing the reason for dismissal in an organisation.
  • Dismissal on suspicion, short of positive belief.
  • Reasonable adjustments; no general requirement to maintain higher level of pay.
  • Enforcement; burden of proof; effect of Equality Act 2010; submission of no case to answer.

The four cases considered this month are an eclectic lot. The only connection between them is that they all concern issues (depressingly?) well known to employment lawyers. The first contains a warning not to overuse a relatively recent Supreme Court decision on how to establish ‘the reason’ for a dismissal in the case of an organisation. The second explores yet again one of the most contentious areas in unfair dismissal law, namely when an employee can be fairly dismissed on suspicion, short of a genuine belief in guilt. It shows how parlous the position can be of an employee caught up in these circumstances, especially when

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: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll