New employment webinar available to watch now - Religion and Belief in the Workplace
14th July 2020
3PB barristers Naomi Webber and Katherine Anderson bring you another chance to see this webinar - first broadcast on 9 July 2020 - in which Katherine and Naomi discuss Religion and Belief in the Workplace, the issues arising and the implications of relevant case law.
Related News
-
Head of 3PB's Employment and Discrimination Law Group Karen Moss (pictured here) has successfully acted in the following high-profile cases: In Selivanov v Reckitt Benckiser Corporate Services Limited KB-2025-001253, Karen successfully sought an interim injunction preventing the summary dismissal of an employee accused of gross misconduct, in circumstances where his immigration status would have been imperilled if he had been summarily dismissed. The Applicant would be eligible to apply for indefinite leave to remain from August 2025,...
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers (3 Paper Buildings) are delighted to announce that the Senior President of Tribunals has appointed Mathew Gullick KC as a judge of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) for the second time. Mathew previously served as a judge of the EAT from 2018-2024, during his fixed-term appointment as a Deputy High Court Judge. This further appointment is again on a fee-paid (part-time) basis. Mathew will continue to maintain his busy practice at 3PB. Karen...
Continue reading -
In Raison v DF Capital Bank Limited & Others [EA 2024 000292] Joseph England (pictured here) was successful before the EAT in having the appeal dismissed. The EAT agreed with Joseph’s argument that time spent in ACAS EC prior to limitation starting is not added on to the end of the limitation period. The appeal arose in the context of the Claimant having issued a claim for unfair dismissal due to having allegedly raised a...
Continue reading -
Employment law specialist Alex Leonhardt (pictured here) appeared in the Employment Appeal Tribunal this spring in Kokomane v Boots [2025] EAT 38, the judgment of which has recently been published. Alex represented the Respondent at both the final hearing and at appeal. The case concerned the proper interpretation of s.27(2) of the Equality Act 2010 in order to determine whether statements made were protected acts, in circumstances where there was not evidence of a clear...
Continue reading
