-
- Type:
- FAQs
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
This case is an example of an employer that needed to deal with the extremely difficult issue of having a disciplinary matter pending against a member of staff on maternity leave.
-
- Date:
- 2 June 2011
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The Court of Appeal has held that the summary dismissal of Sharon Shoesmith, during the fallout from the death of "Baby P", was unlawful. In finding that she was entitled to a decision on her judicial review application, the Court held that her alternative employment tribunal remedy was not "equally convenient and effective".
-
- Date:
- 26 May 2011
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The Court of Appeal has given short shrift to a police officer's disability discrimination claim over his police force's actions after he displayed violent tendencies at a Christmas party that led his colleagues to fear for their safety.
-
- Type:
- FAQs
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Judith Harris, legal director, James Buckley, associate, Dinu Suntook, associate, at Addleshaw Goddard detail the latest rulings.
-
- Date:
- 7 February 2011
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The Tax and Chancery Chamber of the Upper Tribunal has held that expectant mothers can choose to start their statutory maternity pay (SMP) at a later date than the date when they cease work.
-
- Date:
- 15 December 2010
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Aitken v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis EAT/0226/09, the EAT held that, in assessing whether or not a police officer who had displayed violent tendencies had been discriminated against, the employment tribunal was entitled to have regard to the need for a police officer not to appear to present a danger to colleagues or the public.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Claire Benson, Rebekah Martin and Poppy Fildes, associates at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
-
- Date:
- 24 February 2010
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Dansie v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis EAT/0234/09, the EAT held that a police force did not treat a male trainee officer less favourably on grounds of sex by requiring him to have his hair cut, when the same requirement would not have been demanded of a female officer with a similar hairstyle.