header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Rubenstein’s revolution, summary dismissal, off-piste issues & ‘worker’ contracts

215634
In days gone by, judges wrote shorter judgments, barrister Ian Smith, emeritus professor of employment law at the Norwich Law School, UEA, writes in his latest employment law update for NLJ. Surely, they can’t have more time on their hands now?

He expresses his admiration, also, for Michael Rubenstein, editor of the Industrial Relations Law Reports, who received a lifetime contribution award at the LexisNexis Legal Awards last month. ‘Not only did Michael revolutionise the coverage of employment cases, but he also developed a radically new and reader-friendly format, which we now take for granted,’ he writes.

Smith covers the latest tranche of important cases, including two Court of Appeal cases, one on cases of summary dismissal in unfair dismissal law, and the other on the extent to which parties in an employment tribunal case should be kept to an agreed list of issues. Thirdly, he covers a case on the importance of a direct contract in the definition of ‘worker’. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Winckworth Sherwood—David Fendt

Winckworth Sherwood—David Fendt

Restructuring and insolvency practice strengthened by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Billy Poulter & Shay Moore

Gateley Legal—Billy Poulter & Shay Moore

North West residential development team welcomes partner and associate

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Family law boutique expands London team with legal director hire

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
The fallout from Lord Mandelson’s appointment and dismissal as UK ambassador to Washington raises profound questions about constitutional governance, accountability and political appointments
Pastries may be in the firing line while kebabs escape scrutiny, but the reality is far more nuanced
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
back-to-top-scroll