header-logo header-logo

09 October 2008
Issue: 7340 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law

Zeynalov v BP Exploration (Caspian Sea) Ltd (EAT, 3 July 2008)

Rule 19(1) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2004 underlines the importance of an opportunity for the party who is facing a strike-out order to put forward orally his reasons why such a draconian order should not be made against him. A refusal to allow an oral hearing represents a major departure from the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly.

Issue: 7340 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Winckworth Sherwood—David Fendt

Winckworth Sherwood—David Fendt

Restructuring and insolvency practice strengthened by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Billy Poulter & Shay Moore

Gateley Legal—Billy Poulter & Shay Moore

North West residential development team welcomes partner and associate

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Family law boutique expands London team with legal director hire

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
The fallout from Lord Mandelson’s appointment and dismissal as UK ambassador to Washington raises profound questions about constitutional governance, accountability and political appointments
Pastries may be in the firing line while kebabs escape scrutiny, but the reality is far more nuanced
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
back-to-top-scroll