header-logo header-logo

15 November 2018 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7817 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 15 November 2018

​In this month’s employment brief, Ian Smith takes on whistleblowing & exclusion & gives a nod to Sweden

  • Whistleblowing detriment and the liability of fellow workers.
  • Exclusion of overseas employment; some refinements to the Lawson rules.
  • Agency workers; applying the Swedish derogation.

What the three cases considered this month have in common is that they concerned apparently small and precise points in the wider scheme of the various statutory provisions behind them, but ones which were in need of guidance from appellate courts. In the first, the Court of Appeal considered for the first time the fellow worker/vicarious liability provisions introduced into whistleblowing law by a significant amendment in 2013; the result is favourable to the claimant, but the reasoning involved an interesting balancing of the possible anomalies in each side’s arguments, largely caused by the fact that, although whistleblowing is in form covered by the employment law statute, it really bears more resemblance to discrimination law. In the second case, the Court of Appeal established some interesting additions to the Lawson

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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll