A ‘flurry’ of legislative change is also highlighted. Changes in immigration law ushered in a new code of practice for employers, and the law changed regarding minimum wage exceptions, tribunal composition and flexible working.
Smith’s brief includes the use of novus actus interveniens, a common law defence usually used in contract and tort but here deployed in a case involving a teacher who alleged detriment due to whistleblowing.
Smith, emeritus professor of employment law at Norwich Law School, writes: ‘There have been allegations in the press for some time now of employers of employees in regulated employments using the threat (or, as here, the actuality) of reference to the regulator as a tactic in a dispute. This case shows that if an employer is found to have done so cynically and without good cause, the employee can expect full compensation.’
The other cases covered concern causation when calculating damages, and a TUPE case that raised a point of interpretation on which the judge said there had been no previous direct authority.
