Following last week's pre-election guide on qualifying periods and statutory time-limits, we focus this week on Labour’s plan to simplify the law on employment status.

Our May update includes a case on whistleblowing where the claimant’s belief in the disclosures was questioned along with whether decision makers who knew little or nothing about the disclosures could be blamed for those who did – and a disability dismissal case where the bad behaviour/conduct of an individual, caused by a disability, may have contributed towards the dismissal. We also feature a news roundup on responses to the “Sexism in the City Report” and the Labour Party’s plans for reforming employment law if they are elected on 4 July.

Our April update includes a case on AI facial recognition software that allegedly discriminated against black people, a case where an individual carrying out a dismissal did not have enough knowledge of protected disclosures for the employer to be liable for a whistleblowing dismissal, and a case on the issue of acts of discrimination continuing over an extended period. We also feature a news roundup on generative AI in the workplace, awareness (or lack of it) of the new flexible working rules and proposed new legislation limiting the scope of NDAs with regard to criminal matters.

Our March update includes a case on whether a theatre and agency could dismiss an actor playing a lesbian role because of her devout Christian beliefs, and a case looking at whether an employee who spends virtually all her working time on a yacht outside the UK has the right to bring employment claims under UK law. We also feature a news round-up looking at the Treasury Committee’s report on “Sexism in the City”, focusing on employment practices in financial services, the plans for a four day week in summer by the creation of “4ugust”, and the government’s views and written guidance on “Kinship Care”.

Our February update includes a case on the issue of whether job applicants can bring whistleblowing claims, and a case on who pays what compensation to a successful claimant. We also feature a news round-up looking at what employment law might look like under a Labour government, and new EHRC Guidance relating to menopause in the workplace.

Whilst not traditionally a focus of the Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”), the UK’s labour markets now form one of the CMA’s strategic priorities, as outlined in its 2023 to 2024 Annual Plan. The Annual Plan highlights that with the cost-of-living crisis and at a time where finances are under particular pressure, the CMA wants to clamp down on cartel behaviour and unilateral effects impacting household income and labour markets, and therefore is actively pursuing collusive behaviour that affects finances/household incomes. The CMA’s focus on labour markets comes at a time that the UK Government has also signalled its intention to limit post-termination non-compete clauses to a period of three months.[1] Since coming squarely into the CMA’s focus, the CMA has: (i) published specific guidance for employers on the types of anti-competitive agreements and behaviours they should avoid in labour markets; (ii) published a report on competition and market power in UK labour markets; and (iii) has opened a number of investigations into potential anti-competitive behaviour in labour markets (and is reported to be investigating further potential instances). The CMA is not alone in this approach, and follows the activities of regulators in other jurisdictions such as the US and the EU. This article focuses on the key issues that employers should be aware of following the CMA’s recent activity, in particular no-poaching and wage-fixing agreements.

The English Court has, for the first time, considered the meaning of a “catastrophe”, as well as how Hours Clauses work in the context of non-damage business interruption losses claimed under two Property Catastrophe Excess of Loss Reinsurance Treaties.  While the Covid-19 pandemic may feel like a distant memory to some, disputes about the recovery of Covid-19 losses continue to trouble many reinsureds and reinsurers.  The two key issues considered by the Commercial Court in determining appeals from arbitration awards made in Unipol Re v Covéa and Markel v Gen Re may bring welcome, and valuable, guidance to those in the reinsurance industry debating these terms. Those underwriting or purchasing “catastrophe” covers may also want to carefully consider this judgment and whether the Court’s approach to the meaning of that word aligns with their coverage expectations.

Our January update includes a new Court of Session case giving (a degree of) certainty on settlement agreements prohibiting future unknown claims and a new case on constructive dismissal focusing on the rules around delaying a resignation and affirming the employment contract. We also feature a news round-up relating to an updated EHRC Code of Practice and Guidance to accompany the new law on sexual harassment due to come into force in October, the new ACAS Code of Practice on Flexible Working (including day one requests) and changes to the Paternity/Adoption leave rules.