header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
06 June 2014 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7609 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Executive decisions

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
web_employment_executive_decisions_bryden

Chris Bryden & Michael Salter discuss presidential guidance

Previous iterations of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure provided for the making of practice directions. The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 (SI 2013/1237) do not alter this settled procedure, but they additionally permit the promulgation of Presidential Guidance by the sitting President (r 7 of the 2013 Rules (contained within reg 13(1), Sch 1 of the 2013 Regulations)).

In both s 7A of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (ETA 1996) and r 7 of the 2013 Rules the word “guidance” is used. ETA 1996 states that guidance about the application or interpretation or the making of decisions by members of the employment tribunal, unlike practice directions, do not require the approval of the senior president of the lord chancellor. Rule 7 of the 2013 Rules requires that the president publishes any guidance “in an appropriate manner to bring it to the attention of claimants, respondents and their advisors” and that the Guidance is to cover “matters of practice and as

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Firm awards training contracts to paralegals through internal programme

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Private client disputes specialist joins commercial litigation team

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Cumbria firm appoints new head of residential property

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
NLJ this week: Family law urged to ditch adversarial instincts
Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll