header-logo header-logo

Employment law brief: 14 August 2026

257144
© Getty images
Three hundred briefs in, our treasured author & Harvey enthusiast, Professor Ian Smith, has a lot to shout about from the employment coalface
  • Reviews the latest Employment Rights Act 2025 regulations ahead of the next phase of implementation in October.
  • Analyses four recent appellate decisions on restraint of trade, the right to be accompanied, harassment under the Equality Act 2010, and the scope of employment tribunal decision-making.

Legislation changes are hotting up in the run-up to the next major phase in bringing into force the Employment Rights Act 2025 in October. In the last month we have had complex regulations on access for trade unions to workplaces, the lowering of time limits for employment tribunal (ET) actions and extending the permissible forms of trade union ballots.

On the case law front, the four cases considered here cover a wide range. The first is a Court of Appeal case on restraint of trade; usually, such cases tend to be merely factual examples of very old and established law, but here the court considered as a matter of

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

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

DWF—11 appointments

DWF—11 appointments

DWF strengthens North West teams with 11 newly qualified solicitors

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