Employment.jpg
People.jpg
Welcome

Welcome to the Employment Law Update for the UK.

 

In this edition we look at recent developments involving employment contracts, employee status, termination payments, tribunal jurisdiction, TUPE and disability discrimination.  Please click on the title to view any article.

 

As always, please do not hesitate to contact any member of the Employment Group if you have any queries on the issues covered in the Update or any other matters.



Recent cases

Employment contracts

No bonus payable when PILON clause used for early termination

In Locke v Candy & Candy a dispute over the wording of an employee's contract had to go to the Court of Appeal to be resolved but, even then, the three judges were split 2:1 in their decision.

 

Employee status

Agency worker was not an employee

In Tilson v Alstom Transport the Court of Appeal considered the case of an agency worker who had been fully integrated into the workplace of the end-user and had to decide if he was an "employee" or not.  He had a company phone and computer and was even authorised to discipline and dismiss permanent employees.

 

Termination payments

Employer under no implied duty on tax treatment

In Norman v Yellow Pages Sales an employment dispute was settled on the basis that the employer would pay the claimant employee £53,000. Nothing was agreed about tax. The employer then paid the claimant £47,657, having deducted basic rate PAYE income tax from the balance over £30,000.

 

Tribunal jurisdiction

Non-UK employee seconded to UK by non-UK employer may claim

In Pervez v Macquarie Capital Securities Ltd the EAT confirmed that an English employment tribunal could hear a discrimination claim and an unfair dismissal claim brought by a non-UK national against his Hong Kong-based employer. The only UK connection was that he had been seconded to work for another company in the UK.

 

TUPE

Pre-transfer dismissal by administrator not automatically unfair

In Page and anor v Lakeside Collection and anor the EAT confirmed the circumstances in which it is possible to avoid liability for automatic unfair dismissal in a TUPE situation.

 

Disability discrimination

Re-instatement can be a 'reasonable adjustment'

Although the recent case of Hinsley v Chief Constable of West Mercia was concerned to a great extent with specific regulations relating to police recruitment, it is worth noting that the EAT also confirmed that re-instatement could be a 'reasonable adjustment' that an employer could be ordered to implement where, as in this case, an employee had resigned before realising that they were suffering from depression and then sought to get their job back, having later taken medical advice and finding out they had a disability.
 


Print friendly version

 

In this issue

Employment contracts

Employee status

Termination payments

Tribunal jurisdiction

TUPE

Disability discrimination
 

Contact us

What others say

Bird & Bird's employment team is 'highly responsive, thoughtful when you need a sounding board, and always combining solid theoretical knowledge with practical, no-nonsense advice.'
European Legal 500 2008

 

Clients appreciate the firm's ability to provide a total HR service through its combined employment and immigration capabilities.
Chambers and Partners 2009

 

Bird & Bird's international employment and incentives group is 'extremely useful in continental Europe,' and continues to attract high-profile work across the full range of employment issues.
Chambers Global 2009 

 

Bird & Bird's International HR Knowledge Zone

A one-stop-shop online resource for HR professionals and in-house counsel.

Enter Knowledge Zone>>
 



Contact us
 
If you have any queries on the issues covered in the Update or any other matters please do not hesitate to call a member of the Employment Group
.

 

Ian Hunter

Warren Wayne
Elizabeth Lang

Colin Kendon

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

 


The content of this update is of general interest and is not intended to apply to specific circumstances. The content should not, therefore, be regarded as constituting legal advice and should not be relied on as such. In relation to any particular problem which they may have, readers are advised to seek specific advice. Further, the law may have changed since first publication and the reader is cautioned accordingly.


AN 000111-01


BIRD & BIRD

Bird & Bird is an international legal practice comprising Bird & Bird LLP and its affiliated and associated businesses. Bird & Bird LLP is a limited liability partnership, registered in England and Wales with registered number OC340318 and is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Its registered office and principal place of business is at 15 Fetter Lane, London EC4A 1JP.

For details of Bird & Bird, our offices, our members, the use of e-mail and regulatory information, please see twobirds.com and, in particular, twobirds.com/english/Legal_Notices.cfm.

The word "partner" is used to refer to a member of Bird & Bird LLP or an employee or consultant, or to a partner, member, director, employee or consultant in any of its affiliated businesses, who has equivalent standing and qualifications. A list of members of Bird & Bird LLP and of any non-members who are designated as partners, and of their respective professional qualifications, is open to inspection at our London office address.

All such persons are solicitors, registered foreign lawyers or non-registered European lawyers.

.