header-logo header-logo

An unsatisfactory state of affairs?

Michael Salter & Chris Bryden tackle contributions between co-respondents

The remedy that most claimants seek from an employment tribunal when complaining about any form of discrimination is financial recompense and a tribunal can award successful claimants compensation for lost earnings and for injury to feelings caused by the acts of discrimination.

In many claims, there are potentially a number of respondents who may be named as parties to the claim. Tribunals are entitled to make joint and several awards against multiple respondents, as they are required to award compensation in the same way as in claims in tort: Way v Crouch [2005] ICR 1362, under what are now s 119 and s 124(6) of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). In Way the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) then proceeded to explain the principles to which tribunals should have regard when considering whether or not to make such an award. The EAT found that it could have regard to the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (CLIA 1978) and

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll