With the festive season fast approaching Sarah Clarke reviews how employers can mitigate against possible vicarious liability for the acts of their employees during out of work events (while everybody still having a good time!).
View ArticleSearch Results for: CSCM-001 PDF 🐃 CSCM-001 Lernhilfe 🧦 CSCM-001 Buch 🦺 Suchen Sie auf der Webseite ⇛ www.itzert.com ⇚ nach { CSCM-001 } und laden Sie es kostenlos herunter 🎐CSCM-001 Probesfragen
Mark Wilden on “Massive overdisclosure” ordered in departure from business & property courts disclosure regime in Genius Sports Technologies Ltd v Soft Construct (Malta).
View ArticleAlex Leonhardt analyses the case of Hilco Capital Limited v Denise Harrington [2022] EAT 156, in which the EAT considered the evidential burden in respect of claims that an ex-employee suffers disadvantages in the labour market arising from stigma related to whistleblowing or bringing claims against their former employers.
View ArticleSarah Clarke reviews Bathgate v Technip UK Ltd et al [2022] EAT 155: EAT, in which the EAT makes clear that future claims cannot be compromised in settlement agreements under s147 EQA.
Sarah further explores what employers and practitioners could do contractually, to ensure that future claims do not arise, in light of this EAT judgment.
View ArticleEmma Greening summarises the case of University of Dundee v Mr Prasun Chakraborty [2022] EAT 150, in which the EAT ruled that an original un-amended document does not become retrospectively privileged even in circumstances where a comparison to the final version might allow inferences to be drawn about the legal advice given.
View ArticleMark Wilden discusses the case of Pasternak v Prescott [2022] EWHC 2695 (Ch) and explores how the case illustrates the intricacies of copyright protection of historical research.
View ArticleAndrew MacPhail looks at the case of Ellis v Bacon and Advanced Fire Solutions Ltd [2022], in which an appeal was allowed by the EAT against the original Employment Tribunal’s ruling that an employee was discriminated against due to her marital status.
View ArticleThe counsel team for Mrs Brazel in the much publicised Harpur Trust v Brazel case, Mathew Gullick KC, Lachlan Wilson and Naomi Webber reflect on the recent Government consultation paper looking at holiday pay for part-year workers.
View ArticleJoseph England analyses the Court of Appeal's analysis in Arvunescu that considers what wording is needed to settle a claim not yet issued.
View ArticleKaren Moss looks at the case Sarah Garrod v Riverstone Management Ltd [2022] where an employee’s grievance which was based on bullying, harassment and maternity discrimination constituted an "existing dispute" for the purpose of the "without prejudice" (WP) rule.
View Article3PB Pupil Barrister Emma Greening discusses the case Health & Safety Executive v Mr M Jowett[2022], and documents from claimant's previous employment with the respondent being admissible in respect of remedy.
View ArticleNaomi Webber considers the first case relating to Covid-19 and s.100(1)(d) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to reach the Court of Appeal, Rodgers v Leeds Laser Cutting [2022]. The case determines the employers liability in relation to serious and imminent danger claims from an employee during the pandemic.
View Article