Latest Cases

Employment – Unfair dismissal. The employment tribunal (the tribunal) had found that the employee had been constructively dismissed as a result of three acts of harassment related to her sex. It upheld her claims for unfair dismissal and harassment. The employee appealed against the dismissal of her claim for compensation for loss of a chance. The employer appealed against the finding that the act of constructive dismissal was in itself an act of harassment. It also appealed against awards made to the employee for injury to feelings, which had been grossed up on the basis that it would be liable to income tax. The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the employee's appeal against the remedy judgment concerning loss of chance and the employer's appeal against the finding of harassment where the tribunal had been entitled to reach those conclusions on the evidence. It allowed the appeal against the finding that constructive dismissal was in itself an act of harassment. On the true construction of the Equality Act 2010, a resignation which amounted to a constructive dismissal did not fall within the meaning of harassment. The employer's appeal against the award of compensation for injury to feeling was allowed where, on the true construction of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003, such an award was not liable to income tax. 

Employment – Appeal. The employee, an employment tribunal lay member, brought a claim, alleging part-time worker discrimination. The comparator was rejected and the claim was dismissed. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, dismissing the appeal, held that the tribunal had not decided the point based on his own experience, rather than on the evidence. The decision had been plainly correct. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. Confidentiality club orders had been sought in proceedings alleging bribery and corruption during the tenure of Colonel Gaddafi in Libya. The Commercial Court ruled that a confidentiality club order granted by a judge in earlier proceedings should be maintained in respect of two individuals, but not in respect of another two. It further held that a consultant to the claimant should be admitted to the club. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The defendant debtor applied for permission to appeal a decision striking out her defence and counterclaim in relation to a claim by the bank for monies allegedly secured by a mortgage on a property. The Queen's Bench Division held that justice would be furthered if permission was granted. 

Town and country planning – Change of use. The local authority had granted planning permission for the change of use of a second hand car sales site to a car hire business with ancillary office space. The business was on a scrap metal yard. The applicant had been refused permission to apply for judicial review of the authority's decision as the development proposal had not come within the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 1999, SI 1999/293. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed the applicant's appeal as the proposal did not qualify as a change to or an extension of an 'industrial estate development project' as the scrap metal yard could not be so described in accordance with the first column of para 10(a) of the table in Sch 2 to the Regulations. 

Prison – Release on licence. The claimant brought proceedings against the defendant Secretary of State, complaining that women had been the subject of unlawful sex discrimination as a result of the arrangements for placing prisoners in approved premises (APs). The basis of the claim was that the configuration of APs meant that it was necessarily and inevitably harder to place women close to their home than men. The judge held, inter alia, that there had been no discrimination, either direct or indirect. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the claimant's appeal, held that direct discrimination had not been established and there had been no indirect discrimination. 

Practice – Pre-trial or post-judgment relief. The appellant appealed against an order in which a master dismissed the appellant's application to set aside default judgment. The Queen's Bench Division gave consideration to CPR 13.31 and allowed the appeal on the basis that the appellant had a real prospect of successfully defending the claim. 

Conflict of laws – Foreign law. The claimant New Zealand nationals claimed damages for personal injury allegedly resulting from defective prosthetic hip implants manufactured by the defendant. The proceedings concerned the determination of the preliminary issue of whether their claims were precluded by s 317 of the New Zealand Accident Compensation Act 2001. The Queen's Bench Division held that the statutory bar in s 317(1) of the Act had substantive effect and its application was not limited to the courts of New Zealand. Further, there was no additional conduct or other requirement under New Zealand law before the statutory bar in s 317(1) of the Act applied. 

European Union – Jurisdiction. In the course of a dispute concerning alleged unlawful means conspiracy, the claimant company sought injunctive relief against the defendants. The Chancery Division, in dismissing the application, held that the actual damage had not occurred in the English and Welsh jurisdiction, and the court had no jurisdiction to hear the claims as presently set out. 

European Union – Social security. The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling concerning the interpretation of: (i) art 4 of Council Directive (EEC) 79/7 (on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security) and; (ii) cl 5(1)(a) of the Framework Agreement( on part-time work), set out in the Annex to Council Directive (EC) 97/81 of (concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC), as amended.