Liverpool: 0151 224 0500   |   Manchester: 0161 827 4600   |   Email: info@bermans.co.uk   |   Twitter Icon  |  Linkedin Icon
bermans_logo
bermans_logo

Employment Law: Whistleblowing

Can co-workers be liable for whistleblowing dismissals along with the employer? Yes, the Court of Appeal has said in Timis v Osipov. Mr Osipov was the employer’s CEO. Two directors decided to dismiss him after he made protected disclosures. The employee brought claims against the company for whistleblower dismissal under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. He also brought claims against the directors (as well as the employer) under section 47B of the same Act for detriments which led to his dismissal.

Continue Reading

Employment Law: Redundancy trial periods

Is it unfair not to offer a trial period for a more junior role even if the employee did not complain at the time? Yes, if it is a contractual right, said the employment appeal tribunal in George v London Borough of Brent. Trial periods allow an employee to try out a new role whilst being able to fall back on the redundancy package if the new role does not work out.

Continue Reading

Employment Law: Are Uber drivers workers?

The Court of Appeal has confirmed this month that Uber drivers are workers rather than self-employed, in Uber v Aslam. The drivers’ contracts described them as independent contractors. They had to undertake an interview and an induction. They had to perform the work personally. Drivers used their own vehicles, but Uber stipulated appropriate brands and presentation standards. In providing jobs, Uber controlled the key information. They would provide drivers with a passenger’s first name but no surname, contact details or destination. Uber had complete control of the fares. Financial penalties could be incurred for departing from Uber’s suggested route.

Continue Reading

Employment Law: Is an employer responsible for the actions of an employee who has ‘gone rogue’?

Is an employer responsible for the actions of an employee who has ‘gone rogue’ and deliberately posted sensitive employee data online? Yes, the Court of Appeal has said in Morrisons v Various Claimants. Mr Skelton was an internal auditor at Morrisons. He had been recently disciplined and held a grudge against the company. He took sensitive personal data relating to thousands of employees and posted it online. He then told newspapers it was there. The data included names, bank details and salary information.

Continue Reading

Family Investment Companies

robin-hastings-1-1Traditionally, the most common way to pass down family wealth has been by way of discretionary trust structures. However, recent changes to the tax regime now mean that family investment companies (FICs) could offer more favourable tax treatments when deciding how to deal with future generations – particularly for individuals with large inheritance tax (IHT) estates.

Continue Reading

Bermans further develop their sport & entertainment offering

simon-gareth-final

Simon Taylor, a leading sport and entertainment solicitor, has joined Bermans as a partner and head of their Sport & Entertainment team.

Simon, who will be based in Bermans Manchester office, has more than 30 years’ experience and specialises in representing clients within the motorsport and festival/event industries providing a full range of legal services.

He has an international reputation within motorsport acting for national governing bodies & their insurers, circuits, clubs, teams, drivers and motorcycle riders. Since joining Bermans, Simon has negotiated contracts for the 2019 season for F1 drivers and team personnel. He also has unrivalled experience of representing clients at hearings before the FIA International Court of Appeal and National Motorsport Courts worldwide.

Continue Reading

Employment Law: Post TUPE variation of contract

Mr Tabberer and his colleagues were electricians. They were originally employed by Birmingham City Council. Their employment transferred several times by way of TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006) over the years. At the time of the tribunal claims, they were employed by Mears. The employees were contractually entitled to receive an Electricians’ Travel Time Allowance, though the historical reasons for the allowance no longer existed. Mears varied the employees’ contracts to remove the allowance, saying it was outdated.

Continue Reading

Sign up for Bermans Newsletters