header-logo header-logo

Law digests: 4 November 2022

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

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll