header-logo header-logo

Employment law brief: 14 March 2025

211163
Good things come in threes: in this month’s employment brief, Ian Smith rounds up a triple whammy from the Employment Appeal Tribunal on crossed wires, application errors & misconduct
  • Employee liability for inaccuracy in an application.
  • The role of an employment tribunal in misconduct cases.
  • Mistaken belief in resignation can be an SOSR dismissal.

Three Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) cases in the last month have made significant additions to our little subject (!). The first resurrects a point that had gone to sleep for 16 years, concerning the legal implications of inaccuracies in an individual’s application form; the second declines to extend the categories of cases where an employment tribunal (ET) should investigate a point off its own bat, even if not raised by a party; and the third gives guidance for the first time on cases where the employer has terminated the employment in the genuine but mistaken belief that the employee has in fact resigned. This last one is of particular interest on its facts, showing how easily major confusion can

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll