header-logo header-logo

14 November 2025 / Ian Smith
Issue: 8139 / Categories: Features , Employment , Tribunals , Disciplinary&grievance procedures
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 14 November 2025

235682
Out with the old, in with the new: Ian Smith praises a practical approach to early conciliation, plus runs through whistleblowing detriment & future loss
  • The Court of Appeal has confirmed that an ACAS early conciliation certificate is a jurisdictional requirement for certain claims, though tribunals may still allow amendments without a fresh certificate—reinforcing a practical, non-technical approach.
  • The Employment Appeal Tribunal ruled that the Jhuti principle (regarding hidden motives in dismissals) does not extend to whistleblowing detriment cases, protecting innocent managers from unintended liability.
  • Recent cases emphasise that tribunals must base fairness strictly on the established reason for dismissal, and must properly assess future loss in compensation even amid uncertainty.

It is a mercy that the approach of the tribunals and courts to the present system of ACAS early conciliation (EC) has been one emphasising its practical working and avoiding technical interpretations and requirements that could frustrate its overall aim. This is in contrast to the old and notorious ‘standard procedures’ of the early noughties

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

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll