header-logo header-logo

12 July 2024
Issue: 8079 / Categories: Legal News , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Successive contracts, fairness for one & TUPE—simples!

181429

Time-travelling (for purposes of calculating the national minimum wage), successive fixed-terms contracts, a ‘pool of one’ redundancy and ‘economic activity’ are all covered in this week’s NLJ employment brief

Ian Smith, professor of employment law at Norwich Law School, UEA, looks at four recent Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) cases. First, under what justification can an employer keep someone, a locum consultant, on successive fixed-term contracts for four years without them becoming an employee? Smith notes ‘there has been little case law on this for several years’, so the decision is of interest as a factual example.

Other cases considered whether employees should be paid for time spent on a poultry farm bus to their sheds, redundancy unfairness and what qualifies as ‘economic activity’ under TUPE.

Issue: 8079 / Categories: Legal News , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-details

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