Continue reading "Tribunal Jurisdiction: Interpreting Parliament’s intention"
This post is only available to members.
Tribunal Jurisdiction: Interpreting Parliament’s intention
Naomi Oppenheim and Nick Tsatsas review Underhill J’s proposal to broaden the type of claims that the employment tribunal has jurisdiction to hear ‘One of the new employment tribunal rules (r8) may make employers around the world more nervous, because it has the potential to significantly increase the number of claims that English employment tribunals …
Cases Referenced
Cases in bold have further reading - click to view related articles.
- Bates van Winkelhof v Clyde & Co LLP & anor [2012] IRLR 548
- Bleuse v MBT Transport Ltd [2007] UKEAT 0339/07/2112
- Duncombe v Secretary of State for Children Schools and Families [2009] EWCA Civ 1355; [2011] UKSC 14; [2011] UKSC 36
- Ministry of Defence v Wallis [2010] EAT/0546/08/3007; [2011] EWCA Civ 231
- Pervez v Macquarie Bank Ltd (London Branch) [2010] UKEAT 0246/10/0812
- Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd [2010] CSIH 52; [2012] UKSC 1
- Serco Ltd v Lawson [2006] UKHL 3