Articles

Recent developments in commercial landlord & tenant - Liability for commercial rent in the pandemic: a review by Gavin Hamilton.

Grace Boorer reviews All Answers Ltd v Mr W and Ms R [2021] EWCA Civ 606, a discrimination case in which the Court of Appeal reasserts the importance of considering all the elements of the disability status test under s6 and schedule 1 of the Equality Act 2010, and that it is crucial to consider the question of whether an impairment had lasted or was likely to last at least 12 months at the date of the discriminatory acts.

In this article, Andrew MacPhail analyses Cox V Adecco & Others UKEAT/0339/19 and the steps respondents should take to limit the possible risks presented to them by unclear and confusing pleadings from litigants in person.

Naomi Webber examines the Court of Appeal's decision in National Union of Professional Foster Carers v The Certification Officer [2021] EWCA Civ 548, the latest in a number of decisions to look at the unique position of foster carers, this time considering the ability to form trade unions, under Article 11 European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (‘ECHR’) (the right to freedom of association).

The Court of Appeal clarifies the correct test to apply when a tribunal is considering whether or not to make an order for re-engagement when the employer argues that the trust and confidence has broken down.

Specialist employment law barrister Sarah Clarke analyses Kelly v PGA European Tour [2021] EWCA Civ 559.

Specialist commercial law barrister Richard Whitehouse presented a webinar alongside Jack Webb on 22nd April 2021. The webinar examines the impact of Brexit and the pandemic on litigation. Richard's notes are available to read here.

Watch the webinar on  impact of Brexit and the pandemic on litigation here.

Gareth Graham and Matthew Curtis examine the options in this employment law webinar first broadcast on 21 April 2021 and look at the potential pitfalls for businesses looking to make redundancies or organisational changes due to pressures caused by reduced activity.

Read their notes and answers to the most common questions received.

Watch the webinar on 'Preparing to trade in a post-pandemic economy: options available to employers facing uncertain times here.

Specialist employment law barrister Mathew Gullick QC analyses the UK Supreme Court's judgment of 19 March 2021, which completed many years of litigation over the issue of whether “sleep-in” workers were entitled to be paid the National Minimum Wage (NMW) during the whole of the periods when they were required to be at work but were permitted to be asleep.

Asda Stores Ltd v. Brierley & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 44

Employment law barrister Simon Tibbitts analyses the judgment of the Supreme Court handed down on Friday, 26th March, outlining  the clarity the case provides on the approach and principles to be adopted when dealing with cross-establishment comparisons in Equal Pay claims.

Simon highlights the clarity the Judgment brings and suggests large employers would be well advised to review their pay structures.

Smith v Pimlico Plumbers Ltd UKEAT/0211/19/DA

Specialist employment barrister Sarah Clarke analyses the EAT's decision in Smith v Pimlico Plumbers Ltd UKEAT/0211/19/DA , in which Mr Justice Choudhury considers whether a worker is entitled to a payment in lieu of annual leave upon termination, whether such leave was taken or not, in circumstances where the respondent did not provide any paid annual leave during the relationship.

Mallon v AECOM Ltd, UKEAT/0175/20/LA (V)

Employment and civil law barrister Alex Leonhardt analyses Mallon v AECOM Ltd, UKEAT/0175/20/LA (V), a case in which the EAT again urged caution in the use of strike-out applications in discrimination cases, and warned against only considering the first of the three duties under s20 of the Equality Act in reasonable adjustment claims.

L v 1) X 2) Z & 3) E UKEAT/0080/20/RN

Employment law barrister Katherine Anderson reviews L v 1) X 2) Z & 3) E UKEAT/0080/20/RN and examines the principles considered by the EAT in determining whether there was “conduct extending over a period” for the purposes of section 123 of the Equality Act 2010.