header-logo header-logo

11 August 2017 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7758 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 11 August 2017

07_smith

Ian Smith returns to share some tales of whistleblowing, compensation & loss

  • Undone by an oral contract.
  • Whistleblowing: public or private interest?
  • Compensation for non-pecuniary loss: applying the Simmons v Castle uprating.

A couple of weeks ago I went out on the lash with the editor of this august journal, Jan Miller. After a night on triple vodkas with Special Brew chasers, I distinctly remember her saying that she would love to put my fee for the ‘Employment Law Brief’ up to £15m per brief. I, of course, agreed and thought myself well satisfied by this obviously legally binding variation of my existing agreement; knowing that Jan is a gentleman, I did not ask for it in writing. Shortly afterwards, I passed out just as Jan was going on to another pub, muttering something that sounded suspiciously like ‘Lightweight!’.

Some time later, and restored to health, I received the payment for the last brief and was surprised to see that it remained unchanged (a book token for £2.75, redeemable only

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