Category Archives: Case update

Case update (3):  Unfair Dismissal – Disclosure of Salary Details

dismissed
Summary:  Was it gross misconduct to discuss the salary of a senior employee? No, says the EAT in Jagex Ltd v McCambridge available here. Facts:  Mr McCambridge, the employee, was employed by Jagex Ltd, the employer.  Mr McCambridge found a visa application for a very senior employee that had been left on a communal printer…
Continue reading


Case update (1): TUPE – Are workers protected?

cycle courier
Summary:  Are ‘workers’ and not just employees entitled to the benefits of TUPE? Yes, says an Employment Tribunal in Dewhurst v Revisecatch & City Sprint, available here. Facts:  Ms Dewhurst, and two others were bike couriers for CitySprint until 31 January 2018, when Citysprint lost their contract with HCA Healthcare. The contract was awarded to…
Continue reading


Case update (2):  Human Rights and Covert Monitoring

whistle blowing
What do we already know? We updated you in our November 2017 Newsletter Whistleblowing – are you in the know? on the Court of Appeal’s decision in Royal Mail v Jhuti. The Court of Appeal held that automatic unfair dismissal for whistleblowing can only be established if it is the dismissing manager that has been…
Continue reading


Case update (3): Discrimination – Beware False Reasons for Dismissal 

dismissed
Summary:  If an employer lies (albeit in good faith) about the reason for dismissal, is that enough to shift the burden of proof in a discrimination case? Yes, says the Court of Appeal in Base Childrenswear Ltd v Otshudi available here. Facts:  The employee, Ms Otshudi, worked at Base Childrenswear Ltd, the employer. The employee…
Continue reading


Case update (2):  Human Rights and Covert Monitoring

covert recording
Summary: Did covert surveillance of employees under suspicion of theft breach their Article 8 right to private life? No, held the European Court of Human Rights in López Ribalda and others v Spain available here. Background:  Organisations often want to check systems are being used correctly and employees are behaving properly. Some want to use…
Continue reading


Case update (1): Discrimination – Philosophical Belief and Intellectual Property 

discrimination definition
Summary:  Did the dismissal of an employee for asserting her moral right to own the copyright to her own creative works amount to discrimination on the grounds of belief? No, held the Court of Appeal in Gray v Mulberry Company (Design) Limited, available here. Background:  The Equality Act 2010 provides protection against discrimination which relates…
Continue reading


Case update (2): Discrimination – Are Vegetarians Protected? 

vegetarian
Summary:  Is vegetarianism a protected belief under discrimination law? No, says the Tribunal in Conisbee v Crossley Farms Limited available  here. Background:  The Equality Act 2010 provides protection against discrimination which relates to certain listed “protected characteristics” which people may possess. Religion or belief is one of the protected characteristics and is defined as: any…
Continue reading


Case update (3): Unfair Dismissal and Investigations

investigations
What do we already know? We updated you in our August 2016 Newsletter (Case update (2): Unfair dismissal:  HR teams careful where you tread…) on the case of Dronsfield v University of Reading. The EAT confirmed that HR’s involvement in a disciplinary investigation, which goes beyond simply providing advice as to process, can compromise the…
Continue reading


Case update (1): Sex Discrimination – When is harassment sexual?

harrassment
Summary:  Is massaging a work colleague’s shoulders harassment? If so, is it sexual harassment? Yes, it’s harassment, but not sexual harassment, says the EAT in Raj v Capita Business Services Ltd and another (available here). Background:  The Equality Act 2010 provides that sexual harassment occurs where both: “A engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual…
Continue reading


Case update (2): Discrimination – Knowledge of Disability

Summary:  Can an employer have constructive knowledge of disability if, although it did not make sufficient enquiries into the employee’s health, the employee would not have answered such enquiries (truthfully) anyway? No, says the EAT in A Limited -v- Z, available here. Facts:   Z, the employee, (anonymous because of the sensitive nature of her disability),…
Continue reading