CA asked DPP to issue guidance for prosecutors as to when instituting confiscation proceedings would be appropriate.
|
Where the guarantor of a company loan from a bank was also the company’s main shareholder and sole director and on the facts did not believe the audited accounts, the fact that they were negligently prepared and grossly overstated the company’s profits and the company was subsequently liquidated did not allow the guarantor to recover damages. On the evidence the auditor owed no duty of care to the guarantor because even those it was very probably that there might be a guaranto ...
|
The UKIPO had been right to refuse to restore a patent which had lapsed due to non-payment of a renewal fee. The proprietor of the patent had not established that it had taken reasonable care to ensure that the fees were paid by the due date. In particular, the evidence did not show that the proprietor had not been in a financial position to make the payment.
|
The Claimant was a firm of solicitors who had instructed a barrister to provide advice and represent three claimants at the trial of the underlying action. Shortly before trial both solicitors and Counsel became concerned as to whether one of the claimants was capable of providing instructions. After consultation an application was made to the Court to adjourn the trial in order to determine whether that claimant should be represented by a litigation friend. Despite being ordered to atten ...
|
Practice and Procedure - Postponement or stay Appeal allowed against the refusal of an Employment Judge to postpone a two day hearing of a claim of unfair dismissal and race discrimination. The Employment Judge has failed to take into account that the reason for the request for a postponement was the absence abroad of the Respondent’s two key witnesses. Their absence might fatally harm the Respondent’s case.
|
The case involved a workplace accident. The pursuer, a nurse working at the Manchester Royal Infirmary, was transferring a patient by use of a mechanical hoist. The hoist suddenly stopped and she suffered a jerking injury to her back.
|
Disability Discrimination - Disability The Employment Judge correctly struck out the Claimant’s case as it was not reasonably arguable, on the evidence at a PHR, that the Claimant’s intolerance to temperatures below 27oC was a disability within the DDA 1995.
|
Unlawful Deduction from Wages A deduction of £65,000 from untaxed bonus earnings of a trader indicated by the HMRC under threat of enforcement is an excepted deduction under Employment Rights Act 1996 s14(3), which applies not simply to formal determinations under PAYE Regulation 80 but to other decisions. The employer was bound to make the deduction which was authorised.
|
Unfair Dismissal - Compensation The employee was unfairly constructively dismissed. She was entitled to a 6 month notice period that was not paid by the employees in that period, during some of which she received payments for temporary work from a different employer. The ET, applying Norton Tool and Burlo, did not give credit for those payments against compensation for loss of earnings in this notice period. The employers argued on appeal that the principle in Norton Tool had never been held to ...
|
Contract of Employment - Written particulars In determining claims under a discretionary bonus scheme the Employment Judge erred in failing to decide whether the scheme had any contractual content and, if so, what. A claim for a bonus under a ‘substantially equivalent’ scheme on a TUPE transfer is for an unquantified amount and cannot be brought under the Employment Relations Act 1996 Section 23, unless Article 3(c) of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and ...
|
| 1 |