header-logo header-logo

10 May 2018 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7792 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 10 May 2018

nlj_7792_smith

Ian Smith gets in line & tackles variation, termination & compensation

  • When do employees assent to a variation proposed by the employer?

  • Termination by notice; date of effectiveness.

  • Taxability of compensation for injury to feelings.

Three cases of some importance as matters of principle in mainstream employment law are considered in this month’s brief. In the first the Court of Appeal affirms previous orthodoxy as to when employees can (or, more appropriately here, cannot) be taken to assent to an attempt by the employer to impose a variation of contract. In the second, the Supreme Court has given a definitive ruling on when a notice of dismissal given by letter takes effect. In the third, the Court of Appeal overruled the specialist Tax Chamber on the vexed question of whether damages for injury to feelings are subject to tax. In doing so, it went against the approach advocated for some time in Harvey and thus put itself in grave danger of falling foul of ‘The curse of Harvey’,

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

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Sidley—Jeremy Trinder

Global finance group strengthened by returning partner in London

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

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
back-to-top-scroll