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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 18

The EAT clarifies Tribunal's approach on making reasonable adjustments under the Disability Discrimination Act
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • June 30 2010

The EAT has held that when determining whether an employer has complied with its duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA), the first step is to consider whether making the adjustment would overcome the disadvantage suffered by the disabled person in the case of Wilson v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Job Centre Plus) and Others


The EAT confirms associative discrimination is covered by the DDA
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • June 30 2010

The EAT has held that the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) covers discrimination by reason of, and harassment related to, a third person's disability (associative discrimination) and suggested additional wording to the DDA to cover this in the case of EBR Attridge LLP and another v Coleman (No 2


New Agency Worker Regulations due to come into force on 1 October 2011 are under review
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • June 30 2010

Regulations to provide that agency workers have the same basic working and employment conditions as permanent staff were due to come into force on 1 October 2011; however, the government has announced that these are to be reviewed


Additional paternity leave and pay - new regulations apply to babies born after 3 April 2011
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • June 30 2010

New Regulations to facilitate the introduction of additional paternity leave and pay came into force on 6 April 2010, but will only take effect for parents of babies due on or after 3 April 2011 (or children matched for adoption on or after that date


TUPE - the EAT provides guidance on a substantial change to working conditions to an employee's detriment
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • June 30 2010

The EAT has provided guidance on what amounts to a substantial change to a transferring employee's working conditions to their material detriment in the case of Tapere v South London and Maudsley NHS Trust


TUPE: the EAT has held that a transferee is bound by pay increases negotiated post-transfer under a collective agreement to which the transferee is not a party
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • April 8 2009

The EAT has held that a transferee remains bound by pay increases negotiated post-transfer under a collective agreement to which the transferee is not a party in the case of Alemo-Herron v Parkwood Leisure Limited (EAT


TUPE and the Acquired Rights Directive: the EAT has held that a transferee is not obliged to consult, after the transfer, about measures it envisages taking in respect of transferred employees
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • April 8 2009

The EAT has held that neither TUPE nor the Acquired Rights Directive (ARD) requires a transferee to consult, after the transfer, about measurers it envisages taking in respect of transferring employees in the case of UCATT v Amicus EAT


Race discrimination: the EAT has held that Leeds City Council is potentially liable for the act of one of its employees who discriminated against an employee of one of its service providers
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • November 2 2009

The EAT has held that Leeds City Council is potentially liable for the act of one of its employees, who discriminated against an employee of one of its service providers, in the case of Leeds City Council v Woodhouse and others 2009


Disability discrimination: the EAT has held that an employer's failure to make reasonable adjustments to avoid dismissing a disabled employee was sufficient to render the dismissal itself an act of discrimination
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • November 2 2009

The EAT has held that an employer’s failure to make reasonable adjustments to avoid dismissing a disabled employee was sufficient to render the dismissal itself an act of discrimination in the case of Fareham College Corporation v Walters EAT UKEAT007609


Compromise agreements: the High Court has held that a compromise agreement was unenforceable as the NHS Trust employer had acted outside its powers by agreeing an "irrationally generous" compensation package
  • DMH Stallard LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • November 2 2009

The High Court has held that a compromise agreement was unenforceable as the NHS Trust employer had acted outside its powers by agreeing an "irrationally generous" compensation package in the case of Gibb v Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust 2009 EWHC 862