header-logo header-logo

Appeal court confirms double jeopardy rule

10 January 2008
Issue: 7303 / Categories: Legal News , Terms&conditions , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment Law

Employees claiming contractual benefits, such as sick pay, cannot chase further claims against their employers if something else happens to them after the original mishap, the Court of Appeal has ruled.

 

Suzanne Hawkins, a solicitor from Browne Jacobson, who acted for the defendant in Brazier v Wolverhampton City Council, says the ruling confirms the double jeopardy rule applies to damages payments.

 

She says: “This ruling is also good news for the insurance industry as it brings clarity to an area of law that has been in confusion for some time.

 

“Clear rulings on complex issues such as contractual benefits should be welcomed by insurers and employers as they provide guidance on future cases and also deter employees from bringing spurious or speculative claims to court,” she adds.

 

Martin Porter QC of 2 Temple Gardens, who acted for Wolverhampton City Council, says: “The position may be more interesting if the facts are such that the benefit is payable as a consequence of subsequent non-tortious injury or disease.”

 

Brazier, a care assistant, suffered a back injury while at work in 2003. She undertook lighter duties until this work became unavailable. She was then paid sick pay and given notice of ill health retirement. During the notice period, an accident left her unfit for work. Her claim that she should be entitled to a full year of sick pay was rejected by the appeal court.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll