Cases within S

• expand

  Stewart v Moray Council [2006] IRLR 592 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Information and consultation: "Pre-existing agreements" - compliance with information and consultation criteria

    Date:

    20 October 2006

    In Stewart v Moray Council [2006] IRLR 592 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal holds that where multiple pre-existing agreements collectively cover all employees, each must be approved by the employees covered by that particular agreement and detail how the employees will be informed and consulted.

• expand

  Stoke-on-Trent Community Transport v Cresswell EAT/359/93 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Sex discrimination: Dismissal for wearing trousers was discriminatory

    Date:

    1 March 1994

    In Stoke-on-Trent Community Transport v Cresswell the EAT upholds an industrial tribunal's decision that the dismissal of a woman for wearing trousers at work amounted to sex discrimination, because male employees were not subject to any rules or disciplinary sanctions in respect of their appearance.

• expand

  Stokes v Guest, Keen and Nettlefold (Bolts and Nuts) Ltd [1968] 1 WLR 1776 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Stokes v Guest, Keen and Nettlefold (Bolts and Nuts) Ltd

    Date:

    31 December 1968

    In Stokes v Guest, Keen and Nettlefold (Bolts and Nuts) Ltd [1968] 1 WLR 1776, it was held: that an employer does not fall below the standard to be properly expected of a reasonable and prudent employer if it follows a recognised practice, unless it is clearly bad, but it must keep reasonably abreast of developing knowledge, and not be too slow to apply it; that where an employer has greater than average knowledge of the risks it might be obliged to take more than average precautions; and that it should weigh up the risk in terms of the likelihood of injury occurring and the potential consequences and balance that against the effectiveness, expense and inconvenience of the precautions.

• expand

  Strathclyde Regional Council v Neil [1984] IRLR 11 CS (1 report relating to this case)

  • Strathclyde Regional Council v Neil

    Date:

    1 January 1984

    In Strathclyde Regional Council v Neil [1984] IRLR 11 CS, the Sheriff Court held that a contractual provision for repayment by the employee of the costs incurred is not a penalty and can be enforced, provided the amount relates to the loss suffered by the employer.

• expand

  Strathclyde Regional Council v Wallace and others [1998] IRLR 146 HL (1 report relating to this case)

  • Equal pay: case law update

    Date:

    2 March 2007

    This article looks at some of the significant judgments in the area of equal pay over the past year and their implications.

• expand

  Street v Derbyshire Unemployed Workers' Centre [2004] IRLR 687 CA (2 reports relating to this case)

  • Whistleblowing update

    Date:

    18 August 2006

    Legislation protecting whistleblowers was introduced seven years ago. This article reviews the legislation and considers some of the substantial body of case law arising out of it. It also looks at the components of an effective whistleblowing policy.

  • Public interest disclosure: Meaning of "good faith" in whistleblowing provisions

    Date:

    3 September 2004

    In Street v Derbyshire Unemployed Workers' Centre, the Court of Appeal holds that an employment tribunal had been correct to find that an employee's "whistleblowing" disclosure was not made in good faith because, although she believed her allegations to be true and did not make the disclosure for personal gain, her motivation for making it was personal antagonism towards the subject of the disclosure.

• expand

  Street v Mountford [1985] AC 809 HL (1 report relating to this case)

  • Street v Mountford

    Date:

    31 December 1985

    In Street v Mountford [1985] AC 809 HL, the House of Lords held that an agreement that provided for exclusive occupation for a rent was a tenancy, although it had been described as a licence. Circumstances where a person with exclusive occupation will not be a tenant include where an employee occupies his employer's premises in order to perform his duties as an employee.

• expand

  Stringer and others v HM Revenue and Customs sub nom Commissioners of Inland Revenue v Ainsworth and others; Schultz-Hoff v Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund [2009] IRLR 214 ECJ (1 report relating to this case)

  • Working time: Relationship between annual leave entitlement and sickness absence

    Date:

    10 March 2009

    In Schultz-Hoff v Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund; Stringer and others v Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs Cases C-350/06 and C-520/06 ECJ, the ECJ has held that the Working Time Directive allows member states to prevent workers from taking annual leave during periods of sickness, provided that they are permitted to take it at some other time. If sickness prevents a worker from taking his or her annual leave entitlement, it must be carried over into the next leave year. Workers whose employment is terminated cannot have their payment in lieu of annual leave reduced on account of a period of sickness prior to the dismissal.

• expand

  Strouthos v London Underground Ltd [2004] IRLR 636 CA (1 report relating to this case)

  • Unfair dismissal: Employers must take care in framing disciplinary charges

    Date:

    12 November 2004

    In Strouthos v London Underground Ltd the Court of Appeal holds that the EAT was incorrect to infer an employee's dishonesty from the facts found by the tribunal, when dishonesty had not been alleged in the original disciplinary proceedings.

• expand

  Stuart Peters Ltd v Bell [2009] IRLR 941 CA (1 report relating to this case)

  • Unfair dismissal: Norton Tool principle does not apply to unfair constructive dismissal

    Date:

    9 December 2009

    In Stuart Peters Ltd v Bell [2009] IRLR 941 CA, the Court of Appeal held that, in a case of constructive unfair dismissal, the Norton Tool principle that compensation for unfair dismissal without notice must include a sum representing the employee's full pay during his or her notice period does not apply, and the employee must give credit for any earnings during this period.