header-logo header-logo

09 August 2007
Issue: 7285 / Categories: Legal News , Tribunals , Regulatory , Employment
printer mail-detail

THIN ICE

In brief

A penalty for failing to comply with the Information and Consultation of Employee Regulations 2004 (ICE regulations) has for the first time been awarded by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). In Amicus v Macmillan Publishers Ltd the EAT concluded that Macmillan’s failure to hold a ballot breached the ICE regulations, which require larger employers to ensure that employees are informed and consulted. The EAT concluded that “it must have been plain, reading the legislation, that the relevant provisions were being ignored at almost every stage”. No adequate reasons were given for failing to comply with the obligations and a £55,000 penalty was imposed.

Issue: 7285 / Categories: Legal News , Tribunals , Regulatory , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
The Environment Agency can prosecute offences beyond environmental legislation where proceedings support its statutory functions, the Divisional Court has confirmed
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
back-to-top-scroll