header-logo header-logo

25 September 2008
Issue: 7338 / Categories: Case law , Tribunals , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law

GFI Holdings Ltd v Camm [2008] All ER (D) 74 (Sep)

An employment tribunal has a broad discretion to stay proceedings before it under r 10(2)(h) of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/1861), particularly where there are parallel High Court proceedings arising out of similar facts. It is generally desirable to dispose of High Court actions first where there are issues in both sets of proceedings which are substantially the same.

The factors to be taken into account when determining whether or not a stay is appropriate include the degree of similarity of issues between the two sets of proceedings, the complexity of those issues, the technicality of the evidence, the amount of damages claimed, the need for an orderly disposal of proceedings, and the delay that would be occasioned by postponing the tribunal proceedings.

Issue: 7338 / Categories: Case law , Tribunals , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll