An employee’s right to privacy was not breached when his employer relied on data found on his phone during a police investigation into allegations of harassment against the employee by another colleague.

An employer who directly offered its employees a package of revised terms and conditions - going over the head of the recognised trade union - did not unlawfully induce them to cease collective bargaining.

Continuing with tribunal proceedings is as much a protected act as bringing proceedings in the first place.

Voluntary overtime should be factored into the calculation of holiday as long as it is it is sufficiently regular and settled so that payments for overtime amount to ‘normal’ remuneration says the Court of Appeal.

The Equality Act 2010 excludes an impairment of vision where ‘in the person's case, correctable by spectacles or contact lenses or in such other ways as may be prescribed’. ‘Correctable’ is a practical question which must consider not only whether the impairment was corrected but whether there are unacceptable adverse consequences.

Enhancing the pay of women on maternity leave but not men on shared parental leave is not direct or indirect sex discrimination and even if indirect, it would be objectively justified. Where enhanced maternity pay is contractual, the sex equality clause does not apply as it relates to special treatment related to maternity.

A tribunal has made a 25% uplift to an employee’s award following her former employer’s failure to deal with a post-termination grievance.

An employer’s decision to withdraw the offer of an overseas posting to a severely disabled employee because of its medical concerns was not disability discrimination.

The dismissal of a nurse who gave a patient a Bible and proselytised (tried to convert people to another religion) her religious views was fair and did not breach European law.

European law obliges employers to establish a system enabling the duration of daily working to be measured.

Knowledge of an employee’s disability could have been acquired during an appeal against dismissal.

An employee was rightly compensated for loss of entitlement to benefits under a PHI policy when he was unable to ‘return to work’ following sickness absence. The ‘return to work’ was a return to the work he had been doing when he went off sick, not a return to any work.

An employer was not liable in negligence for an injury occasioned to one of its employees at the staff Christmas party; neither was it vicariously liable.

Directors of a limited company can, in certain circumstances, be personally liable for inducing a company to breach an employment contract.

The adverse treatment of a gay head teacher amounted to constructive dismissal and sexual orientation discrimination.

Although a breach of the Working Time Regulations cannot lead to an injury to feelings award, compensation can reflect personal injury suffered as a consequence of the breach.

An employer does not usually need to wait for the conclusion of criminal proceedings before starting or continuing with internal disciplinary proceedings.

The disciplining of an employee for refusal to obey a lawful instruction (due to a mistaken belief it would impact on her disability) was not unfavourable treatment due to something arising from a disability.

The dismissal of an employee on the day of a TUPE transfer because her new employer foresaw ongoing problems with a fellow employee was automatically unfair under TUPE.

Sending an important letter about redundancies to a woman on maternity leave to a work email account which she could not access could be unfavourable treatment under the Equality Act. But whether it was also maternity discrimination depends upon the reasons why that treatment occurred.