-
- Date:
- 6 February 2004
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Pay v Lancashire Probation Service, the EAT holds that a probation officer with specific responsibility for sex offenders, who was publicly engaged in sadomasochistic activities in his spare time, did not have his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights breached when he was dismissed upon discovery of those activities.
-
- Date:
- 31 December 2003
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Fraser v Stolt Offshore Ltd [2003] All ER (D) 185 (Apr) EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that an employer can issue a warning to a fixed-term employee that will be valid for a longer period than the fixed-term contract. The warning will carry over into the next contract and the employee does not have to be notified of this when he accepts the next contract.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
This week's case round-up from Eversheds: covering whistleblowing.
-
- Date:
- 5 December 2003
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Cobley v Forward Technology Industries plc, the Court of Appeal holds that an employment tribunal was entitled to find that a company chief executive was fairly dismissed for "some other substantial reason" following a bidding war and hostile takeover of the company and his removal as a director.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Our resident experts at Pinsents bring you a comprehensive update on all the latest decisions that could affect your organisation, and advice on what to do about them.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering: indirect age discrimination; and homeworking arrangements.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering: mobility clauses and "protected" whistleblowing disclosures.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Our resident experts at Pinsents bring you a comprehensive update on all the latest decisions that could affect your organisation, and advice on what to do about them.
-
- Date:
- 9 May 2003
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Qua v John Ford Morrison Solicitors, the EAT holds that the statutory right to take a "reasonable amount of time off" to care for dependants is a right that applies during working hours to enable employees to deal with the variety of specified unexpected or sudden events affecting their dependants, and in order to make any "necessary" longer-term arrangements for their care.
-
- Date:
- 7 March 2003
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt, the Court of Appeal emphasises that the "band of reasonable responses" test applies to the question of the reasonableness of an employer's investigations into alleged misconduct, as it does to other procedural and substantive aspects of the decision to dismiss.