header-logo header-logo

10 May 2018 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7792 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 10 May 2018

nlj_7792_smith

Ian Smith gets in line & tackles variation, termination & compensation

  • When do employees assent to a variation proposed by the employer?

  • Termination by notice; date of effectiveness.

  • Taxability of compensation for injury to feelings.

Three cases of some importance as matters of principle in mainstream employment law are considered in this month’s brief. In the first the Court of Appeal affirms previous orthodoxy as to when employees can (or, more appropriately here, cannot) be taken to assent to an attempt by the employer to impose a variation of contract. In the second, the Supreme Court has given a definitive ruling on when a notice of dismissal given by letter takes effect. In the third, the Court of Appeal overruled the specialist Tax Chamber on the vexed question of whether damages for injury to feelings are subject to tax. In doing so, it went against the approach advocated for some time in Harvey and thus put itself in grave danger of falling foul of ‘The curse of Harvey’, ie that any judge disagreeing with the editors will

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