Workplace environment

New and updated

  • Protection from Harassment Act covers workplace

    Date:
    1 May 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    An employer may be held vicariously liable for harassment by its employees, in breach of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, provided that there is sufficient connection between the breach and the employment and/or the risk of such breach was one reasonably incidental to the employment, holds the Court of Appeal in Majrowski v Guy's and St Thomas's NHS Trust.

  • Case round-up: Liability for employees' harassment of third parties

    Date:
    5 April 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering liability for employees' harassment of third parties.

  • Case digest

    Date:
    1 April 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    Hilary Slater, consultant with Cobbetts solicitors, provides a round-up of employment tribunal decisions on discrimination.

  • Burden of proof guidelines revised

    Date:
    1 April 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    In a hearing of three conjoined appeals (Igen Ltd (formerly Leeds Careers Guidance) and others v Wong; Chamberlin Solicitors and another v Emokpae; Brunel University v Webster, 18 February 2005), the Court of Appeal considers the guidelines established in Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd (EOR 118) and sets out revised guidance on the burden of proof provisions in the discrimination legislation.

  • Discrimination: Burden of proof finally reversed in direct discrimination claims

    Date:
    25 March 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Igen Ltd & ors v Wong; Chamberlin Solicitors & ors v Emokpae; Brunel University v Webster, the Court of Appeal holds that the amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and Race Relations Act 1976, in order to implement the Burden of Proof Directive (97/80/EC), require a two-stage process to determine direct discrimination.

  • Harassment: Actual or hypothetical comparator required in harassment cases

    Date:
    11 March 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Brumfitt v Ministry of Defence and another, the EAT holds that in all cases of direct sex discrimination, including sexual harassment, a male comparator, whether actual or hypothetical, is required.

  • Type:
    Legal timetable

    The Regulations introduce a new definition of indirect discrimination in employment matters and vocational training; prohibit harassment and sexual harassment in employment and vocational training; and make it clear that less favourable treatment of women on grounds of pregnancy or maternity leave is unlawful sex discrimination.

  • Type:
    Legal timetable

    The Health and Safety Executive publishes its statement of health and safety it intends to introduce during 2005. The HSE has two set commencement dates for bringing in health and safety legislation: 6 April and 1 October.

  • Case round-up: Applicability of TUPE regulations and sexual harassment

    Date:
    1 February 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    This week's case round-up from Eversheds covering the applicability of TUPE regulations and sexual harassment.

  • Sex discrimination: Victimisation by sending letters warning of effect of claims

    Date:
    28 January 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    In St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council v Derbyshire and others, the EAT holds that the tribunal did not err in law in finding that the council had victimised catering staff who had presented equal pay claims.