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.
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 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.
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.
Landlords with unlet, unoccupied commercial properties will welcome a Court of Appeal ruling that a scheme allowing them to avoid paying business rates on them is valid and lawful.
Employers must ensure their recruitment policies do not systemically favour job candidates with protected characteristics, such as a particular gender, sexual orientation, race or disability. However, they can operate a 'positive action plan' provided the relevant candidates are genuinely as well qualified as other candidates to do the job - or risk a discrimination claim.
Family members and dependents seeking to claim 'reasonable financial provision' from a deceased's estate must file their claim with the court within the statutory six-month time limit, and should not rely on a 'standstill' agreement to justify their delay, a recent case makes clear.
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.
Employers will welcome guidance from the court on how to determine whether a worker is 'disabled' within the legal definition.
Employers should not dismiss employees close to a TUPE transfer without taking specialist legal advice, or risk the dismissal being found automatically unfair.