Employment case law
Europe
Disability Discrimination | Reasonable Adjustment
Ring v Dansk almennyttigt Boligselskab DAB; Skouboe Werge v Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening C-335/11, C-337/11 ECJ
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has confirmed that a reduction in working hours can be regarded as a reasonable adjustment for disabled workers where the reduction makes it possible for the worker to continue in employment and does not represent a disproportionate burden on the employer. Click here to read the decision.
EAT
Territorial jurisdiction
Dhunna v Creditsights Ltd [2013] UKEAT 0246/12
The Claimant was employed by the Respondent as an Institutional Salesperson from 23 January 2006 and was initially based in London. The Claimant later worked from an office in Dubai. His line manager was based in New Delhi and he was paid in US dollars from January 2009. The Respondent was based in London as a subsidiary of CreditSights Inc. which in turn was based in New York. The only contract of employment was contained in a letter dated 13 December 2005 which stated the Claimant's place of work to be an address in London or such other office within reasonable commuting distance.
At first instance the Employment Judge, applying the test as set out in Lawson v Serco Ltd [2006] ICR 250, dismissed the Claimant's claim for unfair dismissal and breach of section 10 of the ERA 1999, but upheld his claim under the Working Time Regulations of 1998.
The EAT (Mrs. Justice Slade) in allowing the appeal and the cross appeal, ruled that the case law had moved on since the original hearing before the ET and that the facts as found at the hearing had to be looked at afresh in the light of the comparative and strong connection tests developed in cases since Serco. Click here to read the full decision.
Admissibility of Evidence | Spent Convictions
A v B [2013] UKEAT 0025/13
A was employed by B from May 2006 until his dismissal in November 2011. Following his dismissal, he lodged a claim complaining that he had been unfairly and wrongly dismissed, discriminated, victimised and harassed because of his ethnicity. B wished to rely on A's spent conviction for kerb-crawling in defence of the claims. A wanted the ET to rule that B should not be permitted to rely upon the conviction, and that no reference should be made to it at all during the proceedings.
The Employment Judge decided that evidence of the previous conviction could be given by B as it was relevant to their defence of the claims that any difference in treatment of A was as a result of knowledge of the previous conviction and not because of his ethnicity. The EAT (Keith J) in dismissing the appeal held that the Employment Judge had correctly applied the law as set out in section 7(3) of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (ROA). Click here to read the full judgment and here to read an article authored by Shereener Browne on the related topic of disclosure of previous convictions and cautions to prospective employers.
Employment Law Events
Are you ready for all the new law? The legislative changes to employment law this year
Wednesday 17 April 2013, London
The Employment Lawyers Association will host a one-day course at Royal College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians, 27 Sussex Place, Regent's Park, London NW1 4RG. Up to 5.25 CPD points are available. Click here for full details.
Back to the Future: the Employment Law policies of the Coalition
Wednesday 17 April 2013, London
The Industrial law Society will host The Bill Wedderburn Memorial Lecture at The Royal College of Surgeons of England, 35-43 Lincoln's Inn Fields, London, WC2A 3PE. Click here to book places.
