TUPE expert John McMullen examines important judgments from the past year in the field of the transfer of undertakings.

Problems viewing this email? view it online

Select your email delivery preference

Add us to your safe senders list to ensure you receive our emails

 
Employment Law Bulletin
   QUICK LINKS NEWS  |  SPOTLIGHT  |  CASENOTES  |   POLICIES AND DOCUMENTS  |  
    FROM THE BLOG  |  MORE FROM XPERTHR...
  THE EDITOR'S MESSAGE Issue 828  
 TUPE CASE LAW UPDATE
Joanna Stubbs, Editor

Since our last TUPE case law update in February 2007, appeal cases in the field have covered a wide range of areas including: share sale acquisitions; the transfer of UK-based businesses outside the EU; objections to a transfer after the transfer has taken place; and transfer-related changes to the employee’s benefit. TUPE expert John McMullen examines important judgments on these and other issues.

In an interesting disability discrimination case, the EAT has held that an employment tribunal was entitled to find that the dismissal of a trainee police constable who became unable to serve in confrontational situations because of spinal injuries was not unlawful discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The fact that a qualified officer in similar circumstances might have been relieved of confrontational duties did not mean that the employer was required to excuse a trainee officer from demonstrating the full range of core duties, including service in confrontational situations.

The XpertHR model policies relating to the employment of foreign employees have been updated to reflect the changes to the rules on immigration being introduced on 29 February 2008.

XpertHR Joanna Stubbs,
Editor,
Employment Law Bulletin

MORE FOR SUBSCRIBERS
GO TO XPERTHR FOR
Case law reports
Legal timetable
Policies and documents
Line manager briefings
FAQs
GET MORE OUT OF XPERTHR
Today's tip: XpertHR worked examples
Forward to a colleague
Read previous newsletters
TOOLS FOR SUBSCRIBERS
Advanced search
Advertise a job with XpertHR
Share benchmarking data
Take the XpertHR tour
Print all articles (Read this first)
ACCESS PROBLEMS
Password reminder
Email the helpdesk
or call 0845 671 1110
Take the XpertHR tour
  NEWS

Government responds to paternity consultation

The government has published its response to the consultation on the administration of additional paternity leave and pay.

View Online View article in full Print Article Print article Forward to a colleague Forward to a colleague

English v Thomas Sanderson Blinds Ltd

The EAT has held that the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003 do not cover homophobic banter against a man who is not gay and who is not perceived to be gay by those who made the remarks.

View Online View article in full Print Article Print article Forward to a colleague Forward to a colleague

Okonu v G4S Security Services (UK) Ltd

The EAT has held that the reverse burden of proof does not apply to claims of race discrimination on the grounds of colour or nationality.

View Online View article in full Print Article Print article Forward to a colleague Forward to a colleague
 
Forward to a colleagueTop
  SPOTLIGHT

TUPE case law update

This article looks at the important judgments over the past year in the area of the transfer of undertakings.

View Online View article in full Print Article Print article Forward to a colleague Forward to a colleague

RELATED ARTICLES ON XPERTHR

TUPE case law update February 2007

Forward to a colleagueTop
  CASENOTES

Disability discrimination

Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary

The EAT holds that, although serving police officers who become disabled may be placed on restricted duties to avoid the risk of confrontational situations, it was not reasonable to expect a police force to make such an adjustment to the national training standards to allow a disabled probationary officer to qualify as a police constable.

View Online View article in full Print Article Print article Forward to a colleague Forward to a colleague

Collective redundancies

Hutchins v Permacell Finesse Ltd (in administration)

The EAT holds that the starting point for determining a protective award is 90 days’ pay even where fewer than 100 redundancies are involved and the minimum consultation period is 30 days.

View Online View article in full Print Article Print article Forward to a colleague Forward to a colleague

Sex discrimination

Shaw v CCL Ltd

The EAT holds that an employee whose request to work part time on her return from maternity leave was refused had been constructively unfairly dismissed.

View Online View article in full Print Article Print article Forward to a colleague Forward to a colleague

RELATED ARTICLES ON XPERTHR

Stop press - up-to-the-minute news on key cases

Forward to a colleagueTop
  MODEL POLICIES AND DOCUMENTS

Foreign employees documents updated

XpertHR's model policies and documents on foreign employees have been updated to reflect the changes to the rules on immigration coming into force on 29 February 2008.

Forward to a colleagueTop
 FROM THE BLOG

Launched and run by the editorial team that produces XpertHR and the IRS e-journals, the Employment Intelligence blog is regularly updated with news, comment and links to the latest employment developments.

Here’s a selection of recent posts:

Forward to a colleagueTop
  MORE FROM XPERTHR...

Today's tip: using the XpertHR worked examples section

Want to be guided step by step through scenarios relating to the automatic triggering of maternity leave by illness, or payment for keeping-in-touch days? Each example in the XpertHR worked examples section sets out a scenario and the necessary action in the circumstances, and follows this with a concise explanation.

Print all articles in this newsletter

This newsletter now has a "print all" button. Before pressing it, please be aware that this uses a lot of paper. For the sake of the planet and your toner cartridge, consider whether you need to use it. If you press "print all", this will send to your printer all articles linked from the main column of the newsletter. It will not print blog posts. Print all articles.

Forward to a colleagueTop
Part of the XpertHR Group

Manage your Account

This email has been sent to joanna.stubbs@rbi.co.uk
Add us to your safe senders list to ensure you receive our emails.
Select your email delivery preference (HTML / TEXT)
Unsubscribe from future Employment Law Bulletin emails

© Reed Business Information Ltd +44 (0)20 8652 3500 | Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy

Disclaimer:
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) (\"Intended Recipient\") to whom it is addressed.It may contain information, which is privileged and confidential. Accordingly any dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this message or any of its content by any person other than the Intended Recipient may constitute a breach of civil or criminal law and is strictly prohibited. If you are not the Intended Recipient, please contact the sender as soon as possible.
Reed Business Information Limited
Registered Office: Quadrant House, The Quadrant, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5AS
Registered in England under Company No. 0151537