header-logo header-logo

Employment

27 March 2015
Issue: 7646 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd and another [2015] UKSC 17, [2015] All ER (D) 185 (Mar)

The appellant’s husband was found by the second respondent employer to have committed suicide, depriving her of the death benefits provided for in his employment contract. The Supreme Court held that a decision that an employee had committed suicide was not a rational or reasonable decision, unless the employer had had it clearly in mind that suicide was such an improbability that cogent evidence was required to form the positive opinion that it had taken place. In the present case, there was no sufficiently cogent evidence to justify the respondents in forming the positive opinion that the husband had committed suicide.

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
Peter Kandler’s honorary KC marks long-overdue recognition of a man who helped prise open a closed legal world. In NLJ this week, Roger Smith, columnist and former director of JUSTICE, traces how Kandler founded the UK’s first law centre in 1970, challenging a profession that was largely seen as 'fixers for the rich and apologists for criminals'
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
back-to-top-scroll