Articles

Emma Greening summarises the case of Mr J Hilaire v Luton Borough Council [2022] EAT 166, in which the EAT concluded that an appeal could not succeed based on the fact that the ET were best placed to conclude it was not the effects of disability which prevented the claimant's compliance with a PCP, rather it was a choice he made.

Alex Leonhardt analyses the case of Nexus v RMT & Unite the Union [2022] EWCA Civ 1408, in which the Court of Appeal considered the application of the contractual doctrine of mistake - both common mistake and unilateral mistake - in the context of a collective bargaining agreement, and its potential consideration by Employment Tribunals.

3PB specialist commercial and chancery barrister Aaron Mayers discusses the case of Gorbachev v Guriev [2022] EWCA Civ 1270 and investigates how the case sets a precedence for the meaning of extra-territoriality.

3PB's Rachel Bale considers expectation vs reality in a recent Supreme Court judgment - Guest and another v Guest [2022] UKSC 27. The case discussed the correct approach in calculating the type and amount of equitable relief to be awarded where proprietary estoppel has been made out. This case involved a family dispute over, Tump Farm, a working dairy farm which has been owned by the Guest family since 1938. An interesting aspect of this case is that the court had to consider how to deal with promises of future inheritance where the promisor is still alive. As is often the case with familial issues, the solution is not necessarily clear-cut...

Mark Wilden discusses the case of Pasternak v Prescott [2022] EWHC 2695 (Ch) and explores how the case illustrates the intricacies of copyright protection of historical research.

Alex Leonhardt analyses the case of Hilco Capital Limited v Denise Harrington [2022] EAT 156, in which the EAT considered the evidential burden in respect of claims that an ex-employee suffers disadvantages in the labour market arising from stigma related to whistleblowing or bringing claims against their former employers.

Sarah Clarke reviews Bathgate v Technip UK Ltd et al [2022] EAT 155: EAT, in which the EAT makes clear that future claims cannot be compromised in settlement agreements under s147 EQA.

Sarah further explores what employers and practitioners could do contractually, to ensure that future claims do not arise, in light of this EAT judgment.

Emma Greening summarises the case of University of Dundee v Mr Prasun Chakraborty [2022] EAT 150, in which the EAT ruled that an original un-amended document does not become retrospectively privileged even in circumstances where a comparison to the final version might allow inferences to be drawn about the legal advice given.

Mark Wilden on “Massive overdisclosure” ordered in departure from business & property courts disclosure regime in Genius Sports Technologies Ltd v Soft Construct (Malta).

3PB’s specialist family and education law barrister Aimee Fox, alongside law firm Anthony Collins’ associate solicitor Kadie Bennett, have co-authored a briefing in Education Law Monitor focusing on considerations for parents of children with SEN when resolving financial matters in court resulting from separation.

Cheryl Jones analyses Ellis v John Hodge Solicitors (a firm) EWHC 2284 (Comm), a case which raises the relevance of the long established right of the lien. Cheryl examines in particular the circumstances in which the power of the lien may be in turn strengthened or weakened.

The Government has opened a consultation exercise to garner input on an administrative approvals process designed to create scrutiny and afford assurance in relation to certain public sector exit decisions.