Lidl Ltd v Central Arbitration Committee [2017] EWCA Civ 328, CA

30 August 2017

For the purposes of determining whether a declaration should be made requiring an employer to recognise a union for the purposes of collective bargaining, the desirability of avoiding small fragmented bargaining units within an undertaking did not apply as a relevant factor where there was a single proposed bargaining unit and no risk of proliferation.

De Souza v Vinci Construction (UK) Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 879, CA

23 August 2017

The 10% uplift in damages for personal injury, as established by the Court of Appeal in Simmons v Castle [2012] EWCA Civ 1039, CA, applies to compensation for injury to feelings and psychiatric injury awarded by tribunals for discrimination.

Small v Shrewsbury and Telford Hospitals NHS Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 882, CA

9 August 2017

Where there was evidence to such effect, employment tribunals should consider, as a matter of course, whether the claimant had a head of claim, as established in Abbey National plc v Chagger [2009] EWCA Civ 1202, [2010] ICR 397, CA, on the basis that his or her future loss of earnings had or would continue after the date his or her employment would have ended, due to the stigma arising out of having been unfairly dismissed and having brought such a claim.

Chesterton Global Ltd v Nurmohamed [2017] EWCA Civ 979, CA

2 August 2017

The statutory criterion of what is in the public interest so as to cause a disclosure to be protected does not lend itself to absolute rules, still less when the decisive question is not what is in fact in the public interest but what could reasonably be believed to be. The possibility that the disclosure of a breach of a worker’s contract may nevertheless be in the public interest could not be ruled out where a sufficiently large number of other employees shared the same interest.

HM Revenue & Customs v Garau [2017] UKEAT/0348/16/LA, EAT

12 July 2017

The provisions requiring a claimant to obtain an early conciliation certificate from Acas before the commencement of employment tribunal proceedings do not allow for more than one certificate of early conciliation per “matter” to be issued by Acas. If more than one such certificate is issued, a second or subsequent certificate is outside the statutory scheme and has no impact on the limitation period.

Fulton v Bear Scotland Ltd [2016] UKEAT/0010/16/JW, EAT

5 July 2017

Proceedings claiming holiday pay must be brought within three months of the non-payment or the last of a series of such failures to pay the full entitlement and where there is a gap of more than three months between any two periods of underpaid leave, any proceedings in respect of the period which pre-dates such a gap will be out of time.

Harrod v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police [2015] EWCA Civ 191, CA

30 June 2017

The use of a power which allowed for the compulsory retirement of certain police officers who had an immediate entitlement to a pension, so as to achieve budget cuts imposed by central Government, did not amount to unlawful age discrimination as it was justified as being a proportionate way of achieving a legitimate aim, as the only way the police forces concerned could be certain of achieving the necessary reduction in officer numbers was by use of this power.

Focus Care Agency Limited v Roberts [2017] UKEAT/0143/16/DM, EAT

21 June 2017

The issue of whether employees who carry out sleep-in shifts are entitled to be paid the National Minimum Wage (NMW) for the full duration of the sleep-in shift, or whether they are only entitled to the NMW when they are awake and carrying out relevant duties, requires a multifactorial evaluation. No single factor is determinative and the relevance and the weight to be attached to particular factors will vary with and depend on the context and circumstances of the particular case.

Sargeant v London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (2017) Employment Tribunal Case Number 2202235/2015

14 June 2017

The transitional provisions in the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme 2015, which protected employees closer to retirement, were held to be objectively justified and therefore not directly discriminatory on the ground of age. Although the transitional protection was age-related, it was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim having regard to the expectation of employees that their pension entitlement would not change significantly when they were close to retirement.