header-logo header-logo

An unsatisfactory state of affairs?

Michael Salter & Chris Bryden tackle contributions between co-respondents

The remedy that most claimants seek from an employment tribunal when complaining about any form of discrimination is financial recompense and a tribunal can award successful claimants compensation for lost earnings and for injury to feelings caused by the acts of discrimination.

In many claims, there are potentially a number of respondents who may be named as parties to the claim. Tribunals are entitled to make joint and several awards against multiple respondents, as they are required to award compensation in the same way as in claims in tort: Way v Crouch [2005] ICR 1362, under what are now s 119 and s 124(6) of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). In Way the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) then proceeded to explain the principles to which tribunals should have regard when considering whether or not to make such an award. The EAT found that it could have regard to the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (CLIA 1978) and apportion liability between various respondents where it was “just and

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