header-logo header-logo

Employment law brief: 13 June 2025

13 June 2025 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8120 / Categories: Features , Employment , Whistleblowing , Tribunals
printer mail-detail
222357
Ian Smith chews over a bad apple, part-time status, missing appeal documents & whistleblowing detriments
  • Part-time status: must it be the sole reason?
  • A more liberal approach to missing appeal documents.
  • Whistleblowing detriment: vicarious liability for agents.
  • Equal value claims and job evaluation studies: is there a ‘bad apple’ principle?

Two Court of Appeal cases in the last month are of particular importance on very different problems in current employment law—namely the requirement of causation in part-time worker cases, and the right approach to be taken to incomplete documentation in an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), in the light of a legislative change in 2023. In the case of the latter, it should finally determine the point but, for reasons explained below, the former may not be the last word.

In addition, two EAT cases are considered here, relating to vicarious liability of agents in whistleblowing law and the position of job evaluation schemes in equal value cases.

Part-time status

Augustine

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 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
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll