header-logo header-logo

10 December 2020 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7914 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals , Discrimination
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 11 December 2020

34122
Ian Smith signs off for the year with a salute to Shakespeare
  • Considerations for applications to amend employment tribunal claims.
  • Guidance on when to order special disclosure in an employment tribunal.
  • ‘Cost-plus’ justification in discrimination law.

It has been said that the works of Shakespeare are less a collection of plays than a long series of quotations. The same might be said of Vaughan v Modality Partnership (2020) UKEAT/0147/20, the first reported decision of the new Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) judge (and, we are delighted to say, our new Harvey editor), Judge James Tayler, which subjects the law on amending employment tribunal (ET) claims to fresh scrutiny and contains several highly quotable passages for any lawyers or representatives having to deal with this matter.

The judgment starts with this salutary reminder about using well established principles of law:

‘This appeal concerns the correct approach to adopt when considering an application to amend. It might be said that everything that needs to be said about amendment has already been said. That is probably true,

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll