header-logo header-logo

Employment law brief: 11 December 2019

11 December 2019 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7868 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail
13024
What makes people tick? Ian Smith signs off for the year with some sobering disclosures on motivation & revenge
  • Establishing ‘the reason’ for dismissal in an organisation.
  • Public interest and the claimant’s motivation.

The cases considered this month concern the law on protection of whistleblowers (as it happens, at the same time as the EU has produced a draft Directive on this issue, which hitherto has been purely a question of UK domestic law). The first, and most important, is the decision of the Supreme Court on how to determine the thinking/motivation of ‘the employer’ in an organisation, in particular where the dismissing manager has genuinely done so for another reason, but has been misled by another manager seeking revenge on the whistleblower. As will be seen, the significance of this case extends to other areas of unfair dismissal law. The second case is a decision of the Court of Appeal on the important but potentially difficult element of ‘public interest’ and the claimant’s motivation in making the disclosure(s)

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)
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
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll