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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll