July 2009 Archives - 2/2 - Employment Law Advocates

Dark law – Employment status Part 1

13-Jul-2009 / James Medhurst / No Comments

Employment status can appear to be a very¬†confusing issue. It proliferates¬†authorities¬†containing¬†such exotic¬†terms¬†as¬†'mutuality of obligations',¬†the 'control test' and the 'economic reality' test.¬†Witness statements¬†often contain a vast shopping list of details about the nature of the employment relationship from the layout of the office¬† to¬†the ownership of the company fax machine.¬†There have been decisive shifts in the short history of Employment Tribunals so that, in the 1980s, they were quick to find shams while, more recently, they have been reluctant to depart ...

Read & Comment

What is likely?

08-Jul-2009 / James Medhurst / No Comments

A¬†key role¬†of the House of Lords is preserving consistency in the interpretation of statutes across many different areas of law. While it¬†is sometimes criticised, containing as it does no employment lawyers, for losing sight of industrial reality, it can also provide a refreshingly straightforward approach. Such is the case in SCA Packaging v Boyle, which concerns the meaning of the word 'likely' in determining, for the purposes of the Disability Discrimination Act, whether or not¬†the adverse effect of an impairment ...

Read & Comment

More about constructive dismissal

04-Jul-2009 / James Medhurst / 2 Comments

The case of Nationwide Building Society v Niblett¬†is another well-reasoned decision by Judge Richardson which will hopefully clear up some confusion about the case of Bournemouth University v Buckland¬†that I have highlighted in a previous¬†post. Firstly, it emphasises that the Fairbrother line of cases, which appear to bring the reasonable range of responses test into constructive dismissal law, do not encroach upon the trust and confidence approach. Even if an employer has acted outside the range of reasonable responses, the ...

Read & Comment