11KBW Employment Podcast

Hannah Slarks, an expert in employment law, delves into the significant legal decision of Higgs v Farmor’s School. She explains the interplay between belief discrimination tests and human rights law. The conversation explores direct and indirect discrimination nuances in the workplace, especially concerning gender-critical beliefs. They examine the complexities of Article 9 and highlight recent tribunal cases, advocating for clearer legal guidance. Hannah also shares insights on how the Equality Act continues to shape discrimination interpretations, emphasizing the importance of structured legal analysis.

In this podcast, legal expert Katherine Taunton discusses the case of Lycatel v Schneider and the challenges of determining the preferred forum for a client's case. The limitations of litigating high-value contract claims in the ET are explored, along with the advantages and disadvantages of the High Court versus the Employment Tribunal. Strategic considerations for employees in employment tribunal claims are also highlighted.

Aileen McColgan KC discusses toxic debates and biased judges in two employment law cases. The podcast explores recusal to avoid bias, challenges of alleging bias, and trade union involvement in employee rights cases. They also delve into the concept of bias and apparent bias in the Administrative Tribunal, discuss the implications of judges using social media, and explore the distinction between apparent bias and actual bias cases in the judicial system.

Richard Leiper KC talks to Katherine Eddy about Benyatov v Credit Suisse (Securities) Europe Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 140.  When an employee is wrongly convicted for acts done in the course of employment, is the employer liable for the financial losses that follow? Host: Katherine EddyGuest: Richard Leiperwww.11kbw.com/practice-areas/employment/www.linkedin.com/company/11kbwOn Twitter, we’re @11KBW and on LinkedIn, we’re 11KBW.

Jamie Susskind talks to Katherine Taunton about Kong v Gulf International Bank [2022] EWCA Civ 941.  When an employer fires a whistleblower, the Tribunal has to decide why they were fired. How can the Tribunal separate the fact that the person blew the whistle from the way that they did it? Host: Katherine TauntonGuest: Jamie Susskindwww.11kbw.com/practice-areas/employment/www.linkedin.com/company/11kbwOn Twitter, we’re @11KBW and on LinkedIn, we’re 11KBW.

Amy Rogers talks to Mike Lee about Planon v Gilligan [2022] EWCA Civ 642 [2022] I.R.L.R. 684.  What can we learn from a rare Court of Appeal judgment on interim relief in the employee competition context?Host: Mike LeeGuest: Amy Rogerswww.11kbw.com/practice-areas/employment/www.linkedin.com/company/11kbwOn Twitter, we’re @11KBW and on LinkedIn, we’re 11KBW.

Dan Stilitz KC, a leading barrister specializing in employment law, joins Oliver Jackson to discuss the implications of anonymity orders in the legal sphere. They delve into the balance between protecting individual privacy and the principles of open justice. The conversation highlights the nuances of anonymity in cases like Piepenbrock v London School of Economics, where reputations hang in the balance. Stilitz also addresses the severe consequences faced by individuals, particularly in high-stakes academic disputes, underscoring the importance of safeguarding personal information in legal matters.

Judy Stone talks to Ruth Kennedy about litigation privilege in Loreley Financing v Credit Suisse Securities and others [2022] EWCA Civ 1484.  Can client identities hide behind litigation privilege?Host: Ruth KennedyGuest: Judy Stonewww.11kbw.com/practice-areas/employment/www.linkedin.com/company/11kbwOn Twitter, we’re @11KBW and on LinkedIn, we’re 11KBW.

Sean Jones KC talks to Andrew Smith about religion or belief discrimination in McClung v Doosan Babcock 4110538/2019 23 August 2022 and  Mackereth v DWP [2022] EAT 99.  What do these cases about football fandom and gender critical beliefs tell us about the Tribunal’s approach to protected beliefs?Host: Andrew SmithGuest: Sean Jones KCwww.11kbw.com/practice-areas/employment/www.linkedin.com/company/11kbwOn Twitter, we’re @11KBW and on LinkedIn, we’re 11KBW.

In this podcast, Andrew Edge discusses the Swiss Re v Sommer case, focusing on allegations of misconduct and costs warnings in WP correspondence. The hosts explore the without prejudice rule in employment law and its exceptions, as well as the practice of employers using various defenses to dismiss employees. They also analyze an employment tribunal case regarding improper conduct during settlement negotiations and compare it to the Swiss Re case. Additionally, they provide tips on drafting without prejudice letters containing serious allegations.