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 165

Withholding discretionary bonuses

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 12 2010

In Humphreys v Norilsk Nickel International (UK) Ltd, the High Court has held that an employer did not act irrationally in determining that no bonus was due under a discretionary performance bonus scheme

Interrupted rest breaks are not "on-call time" requiring payment

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 12 2010

In the case of Martin v Southern Health & Social Care Trust, the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal (NICA) ruled that, although a nurse's rest breaks during night shift were often interrupted due to medical emergencies or other more mundane administrative matters, this did not mean that those rest breaks amounted to "on-call time" for which she was entitled to be paid

What constitutes a valid settlement through ACAS?

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 11 2010

The EAT has handed down its decision in Allma Construction v Bonner, confirming that, in deciding whether a valid settlement has been concluded through ACAS, it is irrelevant whether the ACAS officer believes that a settlement has been reached or whether a written agreement has actually been documented

Coalition Government will review TUPE obligations for the voluntary sector

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 11 2010

The Coalition Government has promised to review the impact of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE) on charities, as part of its plans to cut red tape in the voluntary sector

ECJ gives clues on how to justify a retirement age

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • European Union, United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 11 2010

The ECJ has given an important ruling in the case of Rosenblatt v Oellerking, which will be of interest to UK employers who wish to retain a compulsory retirement age after the abolition of the default retirement age on 1 October 2011

Acquired Rights Directive applies to transfers by non-contractual employer

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • European Union, United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 11 2010

The ECJ has recently held that the Acquired Rights Directive (ARD) applies on the transfer of an undertaking by a group company where a different group company employs the affected employees, provided they are permanently assigned to the undertaking being transferred (Albron Catering v FNV Bondgenoten and Roest

Agency Workers Regulations 2010 will not be amended

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 11 2010

The Government has confirmed that it will not amend the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 before they come into force in October 2011

Business groups warn of chaos over pension auto-enrolment reform

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 11 2010

The Government is pushing ahead with its plans to force all employers, regardless of size, to auto-enroll all employees into a pension scheme from October 2012

Associative pregnancy discrimination not prohibited by the Sex Discrimination Act

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 11 2010

In the case of Kulikaoskas v MacDuff Shellfish and another, a man who argued that he was dismissed because of his association with his pregnant partner could not pursue a pregnancy discrimination claim under the SDA

A dismissal letter is only effective when the employee actually reads it

  • Shepherd & Wedderburn LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 11 2010

The Supreme Court has confirmed, in the case of Gisda Cyf v Barratt, that the effective date of termination (EDT) of Mrs Barratt's employment was the date on which she actually read her dismissal letter and not the date, four days earlier, on which it was delivered