header-logo header-logo

13 December 2007
Issue: 7301 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

POSITIVELY UNLAWFUL

In brief

Employers who try to promote diversity at work risk falling foul of anti-discrimination laws, a report by Nabarro, The Perils of Anti-Discrimination Laws, reveals. Positive action often included in diversity strategies to make workplaces more representative could amount to unlawful positive discrimination under UK and EU law, the report says, and that while aspirational targets are lawful, quotas are not. Sue Ashtiany, head of employment at Nabarro, says: “The scope for ‘positive action’ is very limited and it seems inevitable in these circumstances that employers and organisations, including well-meaning ones, will run into difficulties.”

Issue: 7301 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll