header-logo header-logo

04 October 2013 / Keith Patten
Issue: 7578 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Level crossing?

istock_000013052111medium

Keith Patten investigates the complex area of law surrounding statutory employment & common law negligence

The vexed issue of the boundary between statutory employment protection law and employment related personal injury law tends to come into focus most clearly in circumstances where the claimant alleges that they have suffered some form of psychological injury as a result of the conduct of the employers at or around the time of the termination of employment. The question will then arise as to whether these two areas of law operate entirely independently of each other so that the claimant can pursue a remedy under either or both, or whether the circumstances will limit the claimant to one or other of those causes of action.

The fact that this boundary line remains an issue is illustrated by the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Monk v Cann Hall Primary School [2013] EWCA Civ 826, [2013] All ER (D) 129 (Jul).

Re-organisation

The claimant was employed by the defendant as an administrative assistant. Following a staffing re-organisation

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll