News and INsights
Tribunal erred in rejecting Shared Parental Leave claim
EAT allows appeal: ET erred in its dismissal of indirect discrimination claim. Rachel Crasnow QC, specialist in workplace rights, considers the latest appeal in the Shared Parental Leave saga.
Such a clear dividing line? Maternity Leave and Shared Parental Leave: the EAT judgment in Ali v Capita
On 11 April 2018 the EAT overturned the direct discrimination finding of the Tribunal in Ali v Capita Customer Management Ltd concerning whether employers who offer enhanced maternity pay must also offer enhanced Shared Parental Pay. Rachel Crasnow QC considers the judgment in this blog. Cloisters' Chris Milsom acted for the intervener Working Families in the appeal.
Acas early conciliation effect on tribunal time limits and the decision of Luton BC v Haque
Navid Pourghazi considers today’s judgment by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in Luton BC v Haque, which concerned how the ACAS early conciliation provisions affect Tribunal time limits, and summarises the simple approach to take in calculating time limits following the most recent case law, drawing from submissions made by the appellant’s counsel in the case.
The end of the ‘sex taint’ argument in equal pay: McNeil v Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs
Robin Allen QC and Anna Beale consider the implications of the EAT’s decision in McNeil v Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs, one of the first appellate cases to consider what is required to show “particular disadvantage” in an equal pay claim based on indirect discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.
12 Week rights for agency workers: Kocur v Royal Mail
Tom Coghlin QC considers the important judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in Kocur v Royal Mail and anor UKEAT/0181/17, a decision which brings much-needed clarification to the rights of agency workers to the same basic working and working conditions under the Agency Worker Regulations 2010.
When does ‘stand-by’ work constitute working time?
In this blog Andrew Buchan considers Wednesday’s judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union on stand-by work.
New Paper by Rachel Crasnow QC, Discrimination Law in 2018: Pregnancy, Maternity and Parental Rights
Employment specialist Rachel Crasnow QC has published a new paper entitled Discrimination Law in 2018.
New paper 'Discrimination Law in 2018' by Robin Allen QC
Robin Allen QC has released a new paper entitled: Discrimination Law 2018. In his new paper, Robin discusses new cases concerning Sexual Orientation and Religion or Belief as well as Transgender rights particularly in relation to marriage.
Constructive knowledge of disability: Donelien v Liberata UK Ltd
In this blog Nathaniel Caiden considers yesterday’s judgment by the Court of Appeal that concerned constructive knowledge of disability - Donelien v Liberata UK Ltd.
Is Enhanced Shared Parental Pay Legal?
The EAT will hear the appeal in Ali v Capita Customer Management Ltd today on the issue of whether employers who offer enhanced maternity pay must also offer enhanced Shared Parental Pay. The joined appeal of Hextall v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police will take place in January 2018. Siân McKinley considers the significance of these appeals in this blog.
Most of the Brexit rebels are lawyers. Maybe experts are useful after all.
Human rights and equalities barrister Schona Jolly QC has written an opinion piece in The Guardian about the profound flaws with the EU Withdrawal Bill and why lawyers, in particular, are worried.
Algorithms, Apps & Artificial Intelligence: The Next Frontier in Discrimination Law?
Robin Allen QC and Dee Masters from Cloisters consider the interplay between technology and discrimination law in this article.
Denial of UK State Pension to Transgender Pensioner Constitutes Direct Sex Discrimination
Denial of UK State Pension to male-to-female trans pensioner without a Gender Recognition Certificate constitutes direct sex discrimination contrary to EU Directive 79/7.
Time Limits under the Human Rights Act 1998: what is a “course of conduct”?
Anna Beale discusses the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the time limit provisions contained in the Human Rights Act 1998 in O’Connor v Bar Standards Board [2017] UKSC 78