header-logo header-logo

25 September 2008
Issue: 7338 / Categories: Case law , Tribunals , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law

GFI Holdings Ltd v Camm [2008] All ER (D) 74 (Sep)

An employment tribunal has a broad discretion to stay proceedings before it under r 10(2)(h) of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/1861), particularly where there are parallel High Court proceedings arising out of similar facts. It is generally desirable to dispose of High Court actions first where there are issues in both sets of proceedings which are substantially the same.

The factors to be taken into account when determining whether or not a stay is appropriate include the degree of similarity of issues between the two sets of proceedings, the complexity of those issues, the technicality of the evidence, the amount of damages claimed, the need for an orderly disposal of proceedings, and the delay that would be occasioned by postponing the tribunal proceedings.

Issue: 7338 / Categories: Case law , Tribunals , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-details

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