Topics

Local authority information

New and updated

  • Date:
    1 March 2011
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Case round-up

    Judith Harris, legal director, James Buckley, associate, Dinu Suntook, associate, at Addleshaw Goddard detail the latest rulings.

  • Date:
    29 September 2009
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Equal pay: A man may pursue a "piggy-back" equal pay claim by comparing himself with a woman who succeeded in an equal pay claim with a higher-paid male comparator

    In Hartlepool Borough Council v Llewellyn and other appeals [2009] IRLR 796 EAT, the EAT confirmed that male employees may institute contingent claims relying on female comparators who have instituted equal pay claims citing other more highly paid male colleagues. The male employees may be awarded arrears of pay for the same period as their comparators.

  • Date:
    13 October 2008
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Equal pay: Pay protection scheme not objectively justified

    In Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council v Bainbridge and Equality and Human Rights Commission and other appeals [2008] IRLR 776, the Court of Appeal held that a transitional pay protection scheme that, in effect, preserved the previous (unlawful) pay levels of men, while failing to offer equivalent higher pay to women engaged on work rated as equivalent, perpetuated historic indirect sex discrimination and was not objectively justified.

  • Date:
    29 January 2008
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Epstein v Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead

    The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that, in the circumstances of the case, the issue of disparate treatment did not arise when an employee was dismissed but another was not disciplined.

  • Date:
    2 April 2007
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Azmi v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council

    In Azmi v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council EAT/0009/07, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has dismissed an appeal against an employment tribunal's ruling that an employee who was dismissed for refusing to remove her veil while teaching had not been discriminated against on the grounds of religion or belief.

  • Date:
    20 March 2007
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Bull and another v Nottinghamshire and City of Nottingham Fire and Rescue Authority; Lincolnshire County Council v Fire Brigades Union and others

    In Bull and another v Nottinghamshire and City of Nottingham Fire and Rescue Authority; Lincolnshire County Council v Fire Brigades Union and others [2007] All ER (D) 372 (Feb) CA, the Court of Appeal has held that it is not part of fire-fighters' normal contractual duties under a collective agreement to go to accidents and emergencies that would normally be dealt with by ambulance crews.

  • Date:
    6 March 2007
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Craigie v London Borough of Haringey

    In Craigie v London Borough of Haringey EAT/0556/06, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has considered when a contract of employment can be implied between an agency worker and an end user.

  • Date:
    16 February 2007
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Fowler v London Borough of Waltham Forest

    In Fowler v London Borough of Waltham Forest EAT/0116/06, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has reiterated that the duty to make reasonable adjustments for the disabled does not normally include giving full pay to an individual during sickness absence.

  • Date:
    31 December 2004
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Griffiths and another v Salisbury District Council

    In Griffiths and another v Salisbury District Council [2004] All ER (D) 104 (Feb) CA, the Court of Appeal held that the Implementation Agreement reached as part of the establishment of the new national agreement setting up the National Joint Council for Local Government Services formed part of the contracts of employment of the council's employees. The results of a regrading exercise that was carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Implementation Agreement were therefore incorporated into the employees' contracts of employment as legally binding terms.

  • Date:
    31 December 2003
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    London Borough of Southwark v Ayton

    In London Borough of Southwark v Ayton EAT/515/03, the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld an employment tribunal's reasoning in finding victimisation and its recommendation that the respondent should arrange training in respect of racial awareness for the person held to have victimised the claimant, but remitted the claim to the employment tribunal to consider whether the allegation made by the claimant was false and not made in good faith.

About this topic

HR and legal information, news and guidance relating to local authority employers.