We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 98

Negligent misstatement

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 20 2011

An interesting case in the High Court examined the situation where an ex-employer badmouths a former employee several years after employment has ended

Pay in lieu of notice did not include guaranteed bonus

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 5 2011

The Court of Appeal in Locke v Candy & Candy Ltd considered whether a clause providing that an employee had to be employed to receive a guaranteed bonus was sufficient to exclude that employee's right to compensation for that bonus when he was summarily dismissed

Burden of proof test in whistleblowing cases

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 5 2011

In Fecitt and others v NHS Manchester, the EAT disagreed with the EAT decisions in London Borough of Harrow v Knight and Aspinall v MSI Mech Forge Limited when determining whether a detriment had been suffered as a result of a whistleblowing disclosure

Workers must take or request holiday to be entitled to holiday pay

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 25 2012

The EAT has held that, contrary to the decisions in List Design v Douglas and Canada Life Ltd v Gray, workers are only entitled to statutory holiday pay under the Working Time Regulations if they take holiday or give notice that they wish to take holiday

Entire agreement clauses under scrutiny

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • May 19 2011

It is common in employment contracts to include an 'entire agreement' clause which provides that the employment contract constitutes the entire understanding between employer and employee in relation to the employment

Summary dismissal during notice

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • October 31 2011

It is common practice for employers to dismiss employees summarily rather than with notice where to give notice would enable an employee to accrue the necessary one year’s qualifying service (soon to increase to two years) to claim unfair dismissal

Revelation of sexual orientation

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 22 2011

The Court of Appeal in Grant v HM Land Registry held that an employee, Mr Grant, who had disclosed his homosexuality to his colleagues, could not later complain that the disclosure of that information to others constituted direct discrimination or harassment against him

Article 6 ('The right to a fair hearing’) not engaged

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 6 2010

In Hameed v Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, the High Court considered whether Central Manchester NHS Foundation Trust was in breach of Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights when it dismissed Dr Hameed for gross misconduct

TUPE: transfer of care services

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 22 2011

In Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust v Hamshaw the EAT held that where a residential care home for vulnerable adults which had been operated by the NHS closed and the residents were returned to their homes and care transferred to two private sector care providers, TUPE did not apply

Illegal contracts and discrimination

  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • June 23 2011

If an employee works under an illegal contract, he is unlikely to be able to pursue contractual and statutory employment claims