Case Law: WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants

When is an employer vicariously liable (i.e. responsible) for the conduct of its employee? This came up in the case WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants, involving supermarket chainMorrisons and a disgruntled employee. The employee was a senior internal auditor who, acting on a grudge after having been disciplined previously, published personal information about […]

Unfair dismissal: warning for pregnancy related sickness

A law firm’s pregnant employee was granted a £23,000 pay-out after being fired for taking two days off with severe morning sickness. Manchester-based solicitors Gowing Law sacked the employee just a week after she started her new job as a full-time administrator. The employee was successful in her claim for unfair dismissal and pregnancy related […]

£9,000 settlement for transgender woman

A transgender woman who claimed she was rejected for a job as a temporary sales assistant withDebenhams has received a £9k settlement. Ava Moore was invited for interview which was said to have gone very well. She was thought to have all the skills and experience needed for the job as well as being able […]

Not all workers get 20 uninterrupted minutes off

In the recent case of Network Rail Infrastructure v Crawford, for workers deemed “special workers”, compensatory rest need not be an uninterrupted break for 20 minutes. This case concerned a railway signal controller, who had more than 20 minutes’ break available to him in an eight-hour shift but his breaks weren’t for a continuous 20 […]

Employee dismissal – being aware matters

In a complex and ongoing case, the Court of Appeal reversed a ruling by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) which had found that an employee could succeed in a claim for automatically unfair dismissal for whistleblowing even if the person making the decision to dismiss was unaware of the employee having blown the whistle.

Uber loses a battle but the war continues

In our previous update, we advised you that the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) had held that Uber’s drivers are to be classed as workers. This means that they are afforded employment rights, including protection from unlawful deduction of wages, entitlement to the national minimum wage and paid annual leave.

Update on holiday pay cases

The Supreme Court has refused permission to appeal to British Gas in the holiday pay case Lock v British Gas. This provides some much needed clarity. We now know that results-based commission (i.e. commission based on sales received) and non-guaranteed overtime (i.e. overtime which employers are not obliged to offer but workers are contractually obligated to perform) must […]

Adekosan v Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Limited – can gross negligence justify dismissal without notice?

Usually when an employee’s employment is terminated, the appropriate amount of notice must be given by the employer. The Employment Rights Act 1996 sets out the minimum amount of notice that must be given while an employee’s contract could also stipulate that a greater amount of notice must be provided. If the employer dismisses the […]

Tribunal fees report: the introduction of Employment Tribunal fees has “broadly met its objectives” the government concludes

Employment tribunal fees were introduced by the government in July 2013. They range from £390 for a claim for unpaid wages, to £1,200 for unfair dismissal. Official statistics show that in the year after their introduction, the number of claims brought had fallen by approximately 70%. There has therefore been much debate about whether the […]

The Law Society calls for employment law reform in the wake of the ‘gig economy.’

There has been much debate in recent months over the legal employment status of workers within the ‘gig economy’ – a growing trend whereby corporations provide their services through a number of ‘self-employed’ contractors who (in theory) choose to work as and when they please. Because of their supposed employment status, those ‘contractors’ would not […]