header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
21 April 2021 / John McMullen
Issue: 7929 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail

Trust & confidence: a powerful tool

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
46638
Can a failure to secure prompt payment of employees’ bonuses be a breach of the implied term of trust & confidence, asks John McMullen
  • Development of the principle of ‘trust and confidence’.
  • The implied term: a powerful tool.

In Nair v Lagardère Sports and Entertainment UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2608 (QB), [2020] All ER (D) 09 (Nov) the issue was whether the implied term of trust and confidence applied to circumstances where the employer failed to secure bonus payments due to an employee under contracts with other companies broadly in the same group, and where he was (allegedly) ‘strung along’. The alleged breach consisted of a failure to secure payment of bonuses due from other companies in the broad group of companies in which Nair (N) was employed and over which it is argued Lagardère (L) had sufficient de facto control, or where the conduct was a positive ‘stringing along’ and avoiding honouring the bonus payment, leading to a breakdown in trust and confidence. The question in this

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll