In the case of City of York Council v Grosset, the Court of Appeal considered whether an employer was liable for discrimination arising from disability when it dismissed a disabled employee for gross misconduct without knowing that the misconduct arose from the employee’s disability. Read more

In DL Insurance Services Ltd v O’Connor, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that disciplining a disabled employee for having taken 60 days’ sickness absence was unlawful disability discrimination. This case is a useful reminder of the importance of seeking professional medical input when considering disciplinary action in relation to disability related absences. Employers should exercise caution when relying on absence ‘trigger’ points for disabled employees.  Read more

All employers, whatever their size, should have certain critical documents in place now the GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 are in force. With significant fines for non-compliance and an increased emphasis on demonstrating compliance, getting the basic documentation correct is essential. These include separate privacy notices for internal staff, applicants and external third parties, a data protection policy and a record of processing. Read more

In a further example of employment status in the gig economy being successfully challenged, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that a cycle courier was a worker, despite his terms of engagement stating that he was an independent contractor. Read more

In Dynasystems for Trade and General Consulting Ltd and others v Moseley, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employment contract that identified a Jordanian company as the individual’s employer was in fact between the individual and an associated UK company. Read more

In the case of Pimlico Plumbers Ltd and another v Smith, the Supreme Court upheld the finding that Mr Smith, a plumber engaged by the company, was a worker and so was entitled to holiday pay and to claim unlawful deduction from wages, and was an employee for discrimination purposes.  This was despite the fact that Mr Smith had entered into a contract in which he was described as an independent contractor. Read more