Welcome to QualitySolicitors Knight Polson's news page. Here you will find articles on the latest laws, current events and, well, pretty much an array of topics. We like to think having different writers keeps the style varied and we can guarantee every author is passionate about their subject.
If you would like more information please do not hesitate to contact us on 023 8064 4822 or send your email to email@example.com
Employers are already quite mindful of their responsibilities under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations (TUPE) 2006 and employees also seem to be growing increasingly aware of it.
For those who have not heard of it, TUPE 2006 comprises the domestic regulations that give effect to the European Union (EU) law preserving the employment rights of employees in the event of a business being sold (other than by a sale of shares) or of services either being “outsourced” or brought back “in-house”.
We have previously commented on how the courts and tribunals system is structured to provide assistance to those without legal representation (also known as a “litigant in person”).
However, the Court of Appeal has held, in a case involving Employment Law issues that a litigant in person is expected to do everything possible to assist his or her own case before the court or tribunal will assist them.
The Court of Appeal has recently decided whether allegations may constitute information for the purposes of a whistleblowing claim (formally known as a “protected disclosure”) under Section 43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA).
Recent reforms in the legal system have dictated that the parties in litigation claims should attempt to identify and agree upon any issues that they have been unable to resolve before having a final hearing. This is increasingly being applied in the civil courts and is regarded as good practice in the Employment Tribunal as well.