Legal News
‘The X Factor’ has again appeared in the news, but this time not for the entertainment factor or otherwise! An employee ‘threw a sickie’ and then appeared as a contestant on the show. Her bosses recognised her on the show and she now faces disciplinary action for apparently having the flu and appearing on the show at the same time.
Unite are considering legal action against the employers of 86 Sawley factory workers who are docked time and thus money every time they use the toilet. Solicitors are currently reviewing the claims the employees and ex-employees may have against the employer.
One big concern for employers – particularly small employers – is that they will face claims from serial litigants who never even worked for them but who allege a discrimination claim that they must settle or fight. In fact, some of our clients have been the victim of such scams. A fellow blogger on Law Society has highlighted the potential upside to serial litigants in that it is a money-making racket. We have had some involvement in cases where the Ministry of Justice is looking to prevent the Claimants from issuing any more claims, but progress is frustratingly slow.
Finally, consultation has been opened on the new law that gives employees time off to train. This is in line with the new Government's announcement that it is reviewing all legislation in a bid to reduce the burden for businesses. Consultation is only open to 15th September 2010, so you need to be quick if you want to have your say.
Tribunal statistics have recently been published that show that claims for 2009/10 soared by 56% over the number of claims for 2008/9. The figures were partly swayed by the sheer number of claims brought by multiple litigants, as these were up 90%. These are typically the union-backed cases. Unfair dismissal claims were up by 9% and breach of contract claims were up by 29%. It would not be a surprise for these figures to be reflected in the next set of figures. I would expect claims to continue to rise but by a smaller amount as the number of multiple litigant claims falls.
Case Law
August is always a quiet month in terms of case law as it is the holiday period. However, there are a couple of decisions that may be of interest.
In an interesting publicity twist, the case of Duke Amachree v Wandworth Borough Council involved alleged religious belief discrimination and unfair dismissal. The Tribunal ruled that the dismissal was fair and that there was no discrimination, but went on to find that the claimant had breached confidentiality by publicising his case. Oops!
In another EAT case, KLT Construction v Swain, the employer had a lucky escape in being allowed to defend their claim. The employer submitted what it thought was its ET3 by email to the Tribunal. However, it turned out that the attachment was not the ET3 but some other random document unrelated to the case as the wrong file was attached to the email. The correct attachment was sent, but only after the deadline for submitting the response had expired. The Tribunal in first instance refused the employer permission to rely on it, but the EAT overturned this decision, stating that the Tribunal had failed to take into account that the employer had reasonable prospects of defending the claim. Phew!
Sarah King
Sarah King is a Partner at the niche employment law firm PJH Law. You can read their blog here.
Tribunal statistics have recently been published that show that claims for 2009/10 soared by 56% over the number of claims for 2008/9. The figures were partly swayed by the sheer number of claims brought by multiple litigants, as these were up 90%. These are typically the union-backed cases. Unfair dismissal claims were up by 9% and breach of contract claims were up by 29%. It would not be a surprise for these figures to be reflected in the next set of figures. I would expect claims to continue to rise but by a smaller amount as the number of multiple litigant claims falls.
Case Law
August is always a quiet month in terms of case law as it is the holiday period. However, there are a couple of decisions that may be of interest.
In an interesting publicity twist, the case of Duke Amachree v Wandworth Borough Council involved alleged religious belief discrimination and unfair dismissal. The Tribunal ruled that the dismissal was fair and that there was no discrimination, but went on to find that the claimant had breached confidentiality by publicising his case. Oops!
In another EAT case, KLT Construction v Swain, the employer had a lucky escape in being allowed to defend their claim. The employer submitted what it thought was its ET3 by email to the Tribunal. However, it turned out that the attachment was not the ET3 but some other random document unrelated to the case as the wrong file was attached to the email. The correct attachment was sent, but only after the deadline for submitting the response had expired. The Tribunal in first instance refused the employer permission to rely on it, but the EAT overturned this decision, stating that the Tribunal had failed to take into account that the employer had reasonable prospects of defending the claim. Phew!
Sarah King
Sarah King is a Partner at the niche employment law firm PJH Law. You can read their blog here.
Comments