header-logo header-logo

Employment law brief: 4 November 2022

99712
Ian Smith rounds up the latest cases keeping him awake at night, including ‘pool of one’ redundancies, trade union justice & a Post Office postscript
  • Vital nature of consultation in ‘pool of one’ redundancy cases.
  • Importance of the statutory reversal of the burden of proof in discrimination cases.
  • Trade unions—disciplining, natural justice and the absence of bias.
  • Settlement agreements—when do they relate to ‘the particular proceedings’?

When most people are struck with the dreaded midnight wakeful period, they tend to lie there contemplating the meaning of life, the future of the UK economy, whether we will attain the round figure of 60 prime ministers by 2024, and who will go next in Strictly. On the other hand, your humble author lies there contemplating how to deal with ‘pool of one’ redundancy cases, how to apply the statutory reversal of the burden of proof in discrimination cases, what ‘pre-determination’ means in trade union disciplining cases and when settlement agreements can be used in

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
back-to-top-scroll