Articles

3PB’s specialist commercial, public and information law barrister, Mariya Peykova, writes about how Grok has sparked controversy in recent weeks after being used to generate non-consensual sexualised images, with victims predominantly being women and girls.

Katherine Anderson summarises the case of Sandie Peggie v Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton [4104864/2024], a case seen as a major test of the Equality Act 2010 regarding single-sex spaces. The tribunal has ruled that while trans women's use of female changing rooms is not inherently unlawful, employers must balance rights and make adjustments once a complaint from a female worker comes to light.

June Venters KC and Rachel Temple look at the recent landmark case of Re E (A Child) (Complex Fact-Finding: Allegations of Domestic Abuse and Alienating Behaviours) [2025] EWFC 422, in which they acted father at in the High Court.

Mark Green analyses the case of Dr Kate Barry v Upper Thames Medical Group and Others: [2025] EAT 146, in which HHJ Tayler provides guidance and a summary of the law of affirmation. In particular HHJ Tayler explains that if an employer is in repudiatory breach of contract, then multiple factors - not just delay - may be relevant to the question of affirmation.

Michael Smith analyses the case of Mr A and Ms B v C Ltd and Others [2025] EAT 165, a case that illustrates the complexity of assessing psychiatric injury in discrimination claims and the importance of applying correct legal tests.

Simon Tibbitts reflects on the case of Mayanja v City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council [2025] EAT 160, a case which highlights the risks posed by broad or generalised assessments of credibility.

Robin Pickard considers Abel Estate Agent Ltd & Ors v Elizabeth Reynolds [2025] EWCA Civ 1357, a case which provides clarity on the Employment Tribunal’s jurisdiction to consider claims that have not been the subject of early conciliation.

Alex Leonhardt reflects upon Sogbodjor v WKCIC t/a Capital City College Group 2219358/2024, a recent case in the Central London Employment Tribunal, which raised questions of the limits of employee’s powers, and the important distinctions between affirmation and acquiescence.

Alex represented the successful claimant in the proceedings.

In Huntley v Siemens Healthcare Limited [2025] EAT 152, the EAT reminds both parties that they must keep in mind the prospects of their claims and defences at all stages of litigation. Grace Nicholls' analysis of the case also highlights that targeted costs applications may result in greater success.

Following his talk on Remedies in Complex Cases at 3PB’s well-attended Employment Law Conference last month Stephen Wyeth reviews the ‘hot off the press’ EAT decision of Davidson v National Express Ltd [2025] EAT 151, the latest appellate decision dealing with how tribunals should evaluate future loss in unfair dismissal cases.

This article analyses how the UK’s export-control, patent secrecy and investment-screening regimes apply to AI models and datasets that generate dual-use or defence-relevant outputs. It argues that legality turns on capability and potential end-use: an AI system may require a licence because of its technical performance or because the exporter knows or suspects its outputs could support WMD programmes.

Having dealt with many fact-finding hearings on behalf of Local Authorities, children through their guardians and parents over the past ten years, Nigel Hawkins shares his checklist of dos and don'ts when conducting Private Law fact-finding hearings.