header-logo header-logo

13 October 2017 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7765 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 13 October 2017

This month Ian Smith explains why, whatever diplomatic wrangles lie ahead, our European obligations will continue

  • Monitoring employee communications.
  • Forcing contractual change by proposing change and letting employees choose.
  • Don’t expect to be paid for ‘working time’.

At a time of party conferences when questions arise (if allowed to) as to the speed or otherwise of our departure from the EU, the three cases chosen for this month’s column all show the continuing significance legally of our European obligations, which is likely to continue for some time to come. The first concerns the topical issue of the monitoring of employee electronic communications, with the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in effect reviewing its previous rather indulgent view on the matter. The second concerns linked cases from Poland in which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) considered the employer tactic of forcing contractual changes by ‘proposing’ changes and leaving it up to the employees to decide whether to accept those changes or not. Both of

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