header-logo header-logo

Law digests: 2 September 2022

02 September 2022
Issue: 7992 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Costs

FDA Ann Crighton Stuart Sampson Paula O’Toole Paul Whiteman Sue Gethin v Bhardwaj [2022] EAT 97, [2022] All ER (D) 114 (Jul)

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (the EAT) ruled on the parties’ appeal against the costs orders made by the employment tribunal (the ET). The claimant had brought proceedings against her former trade union and five named individual officers, alleging unlawful race discrimination, victimisation and unjustifiable discipline by an independent trade union. Following the rejection of all her claims by the ET, she appealed to the EAT and lost. She appealed further to the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, and lost. She petitioned for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court and was refused. Until her appeals had been exhausted, an application by the respondents for costs against her, made in 2010, had been held in suspense. After her appeals were exhausted, that application for costs was revived. The ET refused three of the applications by the respondents for costs and granted one, namely the application for ‘privilege costs’ against the claimant.

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll