Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Case law

10 cases to watch out for in 2008

by Personnel Today 7 Jan 2008
by Personnel Today 7 Jan 2008

Did you spend the Christmas break fretting about what employment law cases are coming up in the next 12 months? Help is at hand, with XpertHR’s round up of 10 significant decisions expected in 2008.

  • Levenes Solicitors v Dalley
    The Court of Appeal is considering this common issue for employers: is it unfair for an employer to dismiss an employee for a disciplinary offence, where other employees have not been dismissed for the same offence in the past? The Employment Appeal Tribunal found that the dismissal was fair in this case. Ms Dalley, a solicitor, was dismissed mainly for missing a deadline to issue proceedings in a case. It emerged that other solicitors had not been dismissed for that reason in the past.
  • Fairbrother v Abbey plc
    Another significant case on dismissal is scheduled to go before the Court of Appeal. The Employment Appeal Tribunal had held that, in the context of a constructive dismissal claim, the question that should be asked is whether or not the employer’s actions during the grievance procedure fell within the range of reasonable responses.
  • Corr v IBC Vehicles
    Employment-related decisions from the House of Lords are few and far between, so this one is worth looking out for. It is an appeal against the Court of Appeal’s ruling that the widow of a man who committed suicide when severely depressed as a result of injuries sustained in a workplace accident was entitled to recover damages under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976.
  • McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College
    The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that, in determining whether a condition is likely to recur for the purposes of determining if it is long term, it is relevant to consider matters occurring up to the date of the hearing, not just the claimant’s condition at the time the tort was committed. The case now proceeds to the Court of Appeal.
  • Oyarce v Cheshire County Council
    In this controversial decision, the Employment Appeal Tribunal found with “some degree of hesitation and disquiet” that the reversal of the burden of proof does not apply in race victimisation cases. This leads to an unsatisfactory situation where the test in race victimisation is different to the other strands of discrimination. The Court of Appeal will attempt to sort out the mess.
  • Attridge Law and another v Coleman
    A reference to the European Court of Justice that could have a substantial impact on disability discrimination legislation across Europe. Ms Coleman claims that she was discriminated against contrary to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 because she is the primary carer for her disabled son. This raises the question of whether or not the Framework Employment Directive covers discrimination against an employee on the ground of their association with a disabled person. Given that the right to request flexible working was extended to carers in April 2007, this is an important case from a UK perspective.
  • James v London Borough of Greenwich
    With no sign of European-level agreement on giving agency workers clear employment rights, it looks like the strand of cases on when a contract of employment can be implied between a temp and an employer is here to stay. The principles are so confused that all tribunal cases about the status of agency workers have been halted pending the outcome of this decision, in the hope that the Court of Appeal can provide some clear guidance.
  • Heyday (R v The Incorporated Trustees of the National Council on Ageing)
    A decision in this high-profile case is not expected until 2009, but there may be an Advocate-General opinion in 2008. Heyday believes that the inclusion of the default retirement age, which allows employers to retire individuals at 65 or over, in the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 makes them incompatible with the Framework Directive.
  • Johns v Solent SD Ltd
    The case that led to all claims of age discrimination relating to default retirement under the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 being stayed until the outcome of Heyday’s challenge to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The Employment Appeal Tribunal admonished the employment tribunal for attempting to second-guess the ECJ and allowed cases like those of Mrs Johns to be put on hold. However, leave was given to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
  • HM Revenue and Customs v Stringer and others (previously known as Commissioners of Inland Revenue v Ainsworth and others)
    The European Court of Justice is expected to give its ruling in 2008. It is considering whether or not workers on long-term sick leave who have exhausted their occupational sick pay entitlement are entitled to take four weeks’ paid holiday under working time legislation.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Stephen Simpson, employment law editor, XpertHR

Read our ‘Dates for your legal diary’, to find out what legislation is coming up in 2008,

Personnel Today

Personnel Today articles are written by an expert team of award-winning journalists who have been covering HR and L&D for many years. Some of our content is attributed to "Personnel Today" for a number of reasons, including: when numerous authors are associated with writing or editing a piece; or when the author is unknown (particularly for older articles).

previous post
Ignore the predictions of doom and focus on you
next post
Kineo appoints operations director as e-learning business grows

You may also like

‘Unacceptable to question integrity’ of Supreme Court judgment

2 May 2025

Trans ex-judge to appeal Supreme Court biological sex...

29 Apr 2025

EHRC: Interim update on single-sex spaces draws criticism

28 Apr 2025

Opposition to Supreme Court sex ruling is ‘wishful...

22 Apr 2025

Supreme Court transgender ruling: ‘common sense’ or ‘incredibly...

17 Apr 2025

Supreme Court: legal definition of woman based on...

16 Apr 2025

Philip Green loses human rights case at ECHR

8 Apr 2025

Whistleblowing protections do not extend to external job...

4 Apr 2025

Court of Appeal hears Ryanair pilot’s worker status...

1 Apr 2025

Two cautionary tales: how to avoid constructive dismissal...

1 Apr 2025

  • 2025 Employee Communications Report PROMOTED | HR and leadership...Read more
  • The Majority of Employees Have Their Eyes on Their Next Move PROMOTED | A staggering 65%...Read more
  • Prioritising performance management: Strategies for success (webinar) WEBINAR | In today’s fast-paced...Read more
  • Self-Leadership: The Key to Successful Organisations PROMOTED | Eletive is helping businesses...Read more
  • Retaining Female Talent: Four Ways to Reduce Workplace Drop Out PROMOTED | International Women’s Day...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+