Pragmatic & proactive
We provide proactive pragmatic general day to day advice on all employment issues.
Practical & responsive
Our solicitors have all gained considerable experience working for major UK law firms. The fact that we are a niche practice allows us to respond flexibly, sympathetically and in a more cost effective way.
We are experienced in advising both partners and partnerships particularly in relation to retirement of partners or members. We seek to deal with such matters in a practical and sensitive way.
We advise our employer clients on all aspects of business related immigration to assist them with hiring, relocating and retaining staff who are subject to UK immigration control.
In Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood the SC has held that, in the absence of an express contractual provision stipulating when notice is deemed delivered, notice is only effective when an employee has read or has had a reasonable opportunity to read it. ... read more
The EAT has held, in Capita Customer Management Ltd v Ali, that CCM’s failure to provide Mr Ali with enhanced shared parental pay was not discriminatory. ... read more
The Court of Appeal has held, in Carreras v United First Partners Research, that expecting or assuming that an employee will work late can amount to a “provision, criterion or practice” and need not necessarily involve coercion. ... read more
Compensation limits and minimum awards will increase where a claim arises on or after 6 April 2018. The changes include: ... read more
The Court of Appeal has held, in Donelien v Liberata UK Limited, that employers may rely on occupational health reports when evaluating whether an individual is disabled, provided they do not simply “rubber stamp” the report. ... read more
The Government has now published its response to The Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices, along with 4 areas of consultation. ... read more
The EAT has upheld the ET’s decision in the Chief Constable of Norfolk v Coffey finding that a police officer suffered direct discrimination when she was denied a transfer as a result of a perceived disability. ... read more
In upholding the ET’s decision in Parsons v Airplus International Ltd, the EAT has confirmed that disclosures made by an employee solely out of concern for their own self-interest do not amount to qualifying disclosures under the ERA 1996. ... read more
The ECJ has handed down its decision in King v The Sash Window Workshop Ltd. ... read more
The Central Arbitration Committee has found that Deliveroo riders are not workers. An application for recognition as a bargaining unit for the purposes of collective bargaining was therefore denied. ... read more
The EAT has upheld the ET’s finding that Uber’s drivers have worker status and are therefore entitled to various employment rights, including the national minimum wage, 5.6 weeks of paid holiday and the protection of whistleblowing legislation. ... read more
The CA has held in Royal Mail Ltd v Jhuti that only the decision maker’s reasons and motivations were relevant in establishing the reason for dismissal. ... read more
In 2016 the ECHR decided in Burbulescu v Romania that Mr Burbulescu’s right to a private life under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights had not been breached when his employer monitored his personal use of its Yahoo! Messenger account. The Grand Chamber of the ECHR has now reversed this decision. ... read more