Employers can legally provide 'special case' workers - whose jobs may prevent them taking a continuous 20-minute break for every six hours worked as required under working time laws - with frequent, shorter breaks, the Court of Appeal has confirmed.
Employers may suspend employees as a first response to a potential disciplinary matter without it being a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence between them, provided there is reasonable and proper cause, the Court of Appeal has ruled.
Will-makers with financial responsibility for a partner should note that a wish to prevent their partner's children from previous relationships inheriting when the partner dies may not be an adequate reason for cutting the partner out of their will, a recent ruling illustrates.
Employers with, or considering including bad leaver provisions in their articles or a share purchase agreement should consider whether they could amount to an unenforceable penalty, or be unconscionable or an unlawful deduction from wages.
Employers should not dismiss employees close to a TUPE transfer without taking specialist legal advice, or risk the dismissal being found automatically unfair.
Employers will welcome guidance from the court on how to determine whether a worker is 'disabled' within the legal definition.
Employers must follow fair procedures, including carrying out a proper investigation, when deciding whether to issue a disciplinary sanction such as a final written warning. However, a tribunal will not generally re-open the validity of past written warnings when deciding whether a subsequent dismissal is fair, a recent case shows.
Dissenting directors in a boardroom dispute should not 'go public' with the dispute or with confidential company information, and confine these to debate and discussion within the boardroom - or risk breaching their statutory duty to exercise independence in their role, a ruling makes clear.
Employers trying to justify an apparently discriminatory provision, criteria or practice can do so by justifying it in general - balancing its impact against employees sharing a protected characteristic that affects when they can work - and not its impact on the particular employee complaining about it.
Employers entitled to access an employee's personal internet accounts on a company phone or other device should avoid changing the security details on those accounts as this may breach their duty of care towards the employee, a ruling makes clear.