In South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust v Lee and others, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that a decision to withdraw a job offer that was at least partially influenced by a reference that focused on the applicant's sickness absence levels was discriminatory.
An employment tribunal has awarded a claimant damages for breach of contract where he verbally accepted a job offer made by the employment agency acting for the employer, and the employer subsequently withdrew the offer.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that both the claimant's former and prospective employers committed discrimination arising from disability when a negative verbal reference resulted in a job offer being withdrawn.
An employment tribunal has found that an employer did not commit discrimination arising from disability and met its duty to make reasonable adjustments when it withdrew a conditional job offer after health and safety concerns over a job applicant's epilepsy.
David Malamatenios is a partner and Colin Makin, Sandra Martins, Melissa Powys- Rodrigues and Linda Quinn are associates at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.
This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, covers whether or not oral assurances given during negotiations that took place before a contract was signed trumped the written contractual terms.
Georgina Kyriacou and David Malamentenios are partners and Melissa Powys-Rogrigues, Sandra Martins, Colin Makin and Krishna Santra are associates at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.
The European Court of Justice has held that an employer is not obliged to provide an unsuccessful job applicant with information on the successful candidate, although a failure to do so could lead to an inference of discrimination in a subsequent tribunal claim.
Guided by ordinary contractual principles, the Northern Ireland High Court in Robert McDowell Gill and ors v Cape Contractors Ltd rules that the plaintiffs, who had given up secure employment to work for a new employer, were entitled to compensation when the new employer was subsequently unable to take them on. The court found that the employer's promise gave rise to a collateral contract between the parties which was enforceable by the plaintiffs.