header-logo header-logo

04 November 2022
Issue: 8001 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 4 November 2022

Discrimination

Bryce v Trident Group Security Ltd [2022] EAT 137, [2022] All ER (D) 137 (Feb)

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (the EAT) allowed, in part, the claimant’s appeal in employment tribunal (ET) proceedings brought against the defendant company. The claimant, who suffered from two disabilities: Asperger’s syndrome and dyslexia, brought claims of disability discrimination, whistleblowing detriment and automatically unfair dismissal (the claims), arising out of two shifts he had worked for the defendant as a door supervisor. The defendant contended that the claimant had worked for a trial weekend, that he had not been its employee, and that it had not been aware of his disabilities. The claims were dismissed, under r 38(1) of the Employment Tribunals Rules (The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, SI 2013/1237 (the Rules)), because the claimant had failed to comply with an unless order within the specified time. On an application determined on paper, the ET refused to grant the claimant relief from sanctions under r 38(2) of the Rules. The EAT ruled

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

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