3PB’s specialist international and public law barrister Mariya Peykova has reviewed the decision of Turkey’s attempt to re-open Varosha.View Publication
Joseph England reviews the case of Ikejiaku v British Institute of Technology Ltd  UKEAT 0243_19_0705.
Joseph outlines the importance of analysing whistleblowing and other detriments in order to identify whether they are a one off act or a continuing act
Is there a different burden of proof in relation to misconduct cases in which there is a possibility that an employee who works with children may pose a danger?
Sarah Clarke analyses K v L UKEAT/0014/18/JW.View Publication
Is a philosophical belief in Stoicism a protected belief under section 10 of the Equality Act? Yes it is, says London South Employment Tribunal.
Charlotte Hadfield analyses Mr S Jackson v Lidl Great Britain Ltd, Case Number 2302259/2019/V.View Publication
Does the failure to place a redundant employee on an existing “bank” workers list render a dismissal unfair?
Andrew MacPhail analyses Aramark (UK) Limited v Mr Fernandes UKEATS/0028/19/SS (13th March 2020).View Publication
SEND provision beyond 24 September 2020 - a brewing storm?
Caroline Stone examines the forthcoming changes to the SEND Regulations 2014.
Legislating in the time of Corona
Caroline Stone examines the Administrative Court’s recent decision in R (Amber Shaw (a child, by her mother and litigation friend Deanne Shaw) and ABC (a child, by his mother and litigation friend XYZ) in which two disabled children with EHC plans challenged decisions made by the Secretary of State for Education regarding SEND provision during the height of the pandemic.
Council wins Judicial Review challenge to academy order
Katherine Anderson reviews Somerset County Council v Secretary of State for Education  EWHC 1675 (Admin).
“Low arousal” environments examined by the Upper Tribunal
Emma Waldron reviews JI and SP v Hertfordshire County Council (SEN), in which the Upper Tribunal examined whether sufficient reasons had been given by the First Tier Tribunal for rejecting expert evidence and for finding that a school could provide a “low arousal environment”.
Extremely proactiveLegal 500