Employment and discrimination News

Joseph England appeared last week in an interesting case under the Equality Act 2010 heard in the County Court in which a traveller was seeking an injunction and damages from a pub and its landlady after he was refused service. Relying on his race as a traveller, the Claimant alleges that he was refused service because of his race and that this was an act of harassment, whereas the Defendants contend that their belief was...

3PB Employment barrister Karen Moss has had an article published on the impact of Wyatt v Hampshire County Council UKEAT/0013/16 on litigants claiming personal injury damages in the employment tribunal. See http://www.pibriefupdate.com/content/ and the Personal Injury Brief Update Law Journal newsletter this month. To read Karen's artile, please click here.

Simon Tibbitts provides an employment case law update covering: (1) Discrimination awards – all rise by 10%!: De Souza v Vinci Construction (UK) Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 879 (2)  Conduct of an employee does not have to be culpable (whether negligent, reckless or dishonest) in order to constitute a potentially fair reason under s.98(2)(b) ERA 1996: JP Morgan v Ktorza (UKEAT/0311/16/JOJ) (3)  Privilege against self-incrimination and when it arises in the ET: Coletta v Bath Hill...

Gareth and Joseph were recently instructed on behalf of a national retail group to submit a written statement to the Court of Appeal arguing that permission should not be provided to the Claimant in an appeal from the EAT. The appeal concerned the correct process to be adopted at a preliminary hearing by an Employment Tribunal when considering striking out part of a claim, in particular the extent to which evidence should be heard and...

3PB Employment barrister Sarah Clarke provides a case law update covering the past month. Sarah's update includes: Dismissal connected to absence because of cancer treatment was not discrimination arising from disability: Charlesworth v Dransfields Engineering Services Ltd If an employee working night shifts is required to ‘sleep in’ at the premises, are they entitled to NMW for this time? It depends, says the EAT in 3 conjoined appeals: Focus Care Agency Ltd v Roberts UKEAT/0143/16/DM; Frudd v...

In the wake of the snap general election's result, employment law barrister Thomas O'Donohoe examines how employment cases may be affected. To read Thomas' analysis, click here.

3PB's Employment and Discrimination group is partnering with ACAS to deliver a highly engaging Employment Tribunals: An Insider’s Guide masterclass for HR practitioners and people managers that will help avoid common mistakes and show strategies that can lead to a successful conclusion. 3PB Employment barristers James Dawson, Sarah Clarke and Sarah Bowen will take part in the masterclass. Please click here to register or for more information, please contact Chambers Director Russell Porter.

Joe England considers the latest guidance provided by the Court of Appeal on 'unreasonableness' in relation to costs applications in the Small Claims Court, including the extent to which it could apply in Employment Tribunals. The analysis focuses on last month's case of Dammermann v Lanyon Bowdler LLP [2017] EWCA Civ 269. Click here to view the full article

Thomas Acworth summarises an important decision given in Essop & Ors Home Office; Naeem v Secretary of State for Justice regarding indirect discrimination. Click here for the full article

Matthew Curtis reviews some recent decisions regarding evidential issues in disability discrimination cases, with a particular focus on: Stress as a disability Principal’s liability for acts of their agents Knowledge of disability, in particular who has to know for a claim to succeed? Indirect discrimination: the standard of evidence required Dismissing for long-term absence where there is late evidence from the employee To read Matthew’s full analysis, please click here.

Colin McDevitt provides a useful analysis of the Pimlico Plumbers v Smith case, examining when the factors in a business/client relationship might amount to employment or worker status. To read Colin’s full analysis, please click here.

Katherine Anderson examines if an employer can escape “scot-free” from liability for an act of victimisation if it is ‘astute enough’ to instruct an innocent third party – or employee - to carry it out. Please click here to read Katherine’s analysis.