G & G v Wikimedia

In G & G v Wikimedia, the Claimants were a mother and child. The mother discovered that an amendment had been made to the Wikipedia page which related to her and referred to her child. Read on

Monitoring employees at work

Employers will often wish to monitor employees, for reasons including to prevent fraud or other misconduct, for health and safety purposes and to assess productivity and effectiveness. Technological advancements make it ever easier to keep tabs on everything employees do, but the Courts increasingly recognise that employees have a right to some privacy whilst at work. So, how far is an employer legitimately allowed to go when monitoring his workforce? When can an employee reasonably object? Read on

Confidentially speaking

A frequent problem for any employer in a breach of confidence claim is being able to give enough detail to plead a claim properly. Read on

Case Summaries

Tom Croxford obtained the discharge of an interim injunction on the basis that as a short covenant, the merits were relevant to the application and they showed that the departure of Mr Asoyag had resulted in Phoenix’s exit from the business previously undertaken by Mr Asoyag.

Beverley Lang QC represented the local authority in a leading equal pay case. Beverley has also been advising the National Association of Head Teachers on the legal implications of industrial action refusing to administer SATs exams.

Diya Sen Gupta successfully argued that the employment tribunal did not have territorial jurisdiction to consider an unfair dismissal claim by an employee who had recently moved to work for a Canadian entity of the Respondent but claimed that he was still employed by the UK body because he did not yet have a valid Canadian work permit.

Victoria Windle represented a multinational bank successfully resisting the jurisdiction of the employment tribunals over a claim of unfair dismissal brought by an employee working in the UK, but employed by a foreign company.

Paul Goulding QC appeared for the successful respondent. The EAT decided that the without prejudice rule applies with as much force to cases where discrimination has been alleged as in any other form of dispute. BNP v Mezzotero did not create a wider unambiguous impropriety exception.