header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Scope of blacklisting regulations, re-engagement & hurt feelings

14 February 2025
Issue: 8104 / Categories: Legal News , Employment , Discrimination , Tribunals
printer mail-detail
208119
Three cases concerning contributory action and re-engagement, injury to feelings and blacklisted airline pilots come under scrutiny in this week’s NLJ. Ian Smith, barrister, emeritus professor of employment law at the Norwich Law School, UEA, and author of NLJ’s monthly employment law brief, comments that cases on re-engagement, the first in the trio, are ‘relatively rare’. This case ‘shows how carefully an employment tribunal must construe exactly what is expected of it when considering re-engagement’.

Second, Smith highlights the ‘lengthy consideration’ in a recent case of how to approach awards for injury to feelings.

Third, Smith considers the questions raised in a case where an airline created a ‘blacklist’ of pilots who had taken part in industrial action in order to withdraw certain employee benefits. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll