An employer had waived privilege in advice about dismissal and so couldn’t cherry pick which parts of the advice it disclosed.
Whether an adverse effect is ‘long term’ must be judged at the time of the discriminatory act and is not something to be determined with hindsight.
Suspending an employee accused of gross misconduct breached the implied term of trust and confidence leading to an unfair constructive dismissal and if an employer wants to argue that the employee has been dismissed for a fair reason, they must specifically set this out in their defence.
An employee had accepted, by her subsequent conduct, collectively agreed changes to pay and holiday arrangements that had been in place for several years.
Someone who validly becomes an ‘employee shareholder’ did not revert to ‘employee’ status when he later concluded a service agreement with his employer.
It is unlawful to subject an individual to a detriment or dismiss them on the grounds that the employer perceived them to be considering making a protected disclosure.
A zero hours, term-time employee’s holiday pay should not have been capped at 12.07% of her annualised hours as suggested in ACAS guidance but rather calculated using the 12-week averaging method in the Working Time Regulations.
A breach of the immigration rules did not mean that an employment contract was unenforceable.
An agency worker’s right to equal treatment in relation to the ‘duration of working time’ under the Agency Workers Regulations does not entitle him or her to the same number of contractual hours as a directly recruited comparator.
The duty to maintain wage records under the minimum wage legislation transfers to the transferee upon a relevant transfer.
An employer did not have constructive knowledge of an employee’s disability where the employee hid her disability and would have continued to hide it on further inquiry.
An employee making a covert recording at work may be guilty of misconduct.
The posting of a racially offensive image via a personal Facebook account was not done ‘in the course of employment’ and was therefore not an action for which the employer could be vicariously liable.
While at first blush a post-termination restriction was too broad and therefore unenforceable, the offending words in the clause could be removed to render the remainder of the clause enforceable.
The removal of a non-executive director from his post after he spoke to the press expressing disapproval for same-sex couple adoption was not discrimination on the grounds of religion.
An employee suffered whistleblowing detriments following an allegation that his supervisor had been taking a patient’s food.
A police officer, who was turned down for a transfer because her hearing loss was marginally below the medical standard for police recruitment, had suffered direct discrimination because of a perceived disability.
An employer had not simply ‘rubber-stamped’ an occupational health report where the report dealt with the issue of disability in detail and there was no other evidence on which the employer could rely.
Workers do not lose the right to claim historic arrears of holiday pay where there was a gap of more than three months between underpayments holds the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal.
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.
- Page 2 of 5