(1) An employee who is—
(a) a protected shop worker or an opted-out shop worker, or
(b) a protected betting worker or an opted-out betting worker,
has the right not to be subjected to any detriment by any act, or any deliberate failure to act, by his employer done on the ground that he employee refused (or proposed to refuse) to do shop work, or betting work, on Sunday or on a particular Sunday.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to anything done in relation to an opted-out shop worker or an opted-out betting worker on the ground that he refused (or proposed to refuse) to do shop work, or betting work, on any Sunday or Sundays falling before the end of the notice period.
(3) An employee who is a shop worker or a betting worker has the right not to be subjected to any detriment by any act, or any deliberate failure to act,
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and millions of others like it, sign-in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
Take a free trial
This Practice Note considers proprietary estoppel from a generic standpoint.For industry specific guidance on proprietary estoppel, see Practice Notes:•Estoppel and property law•Mortgages by estoppelProprietary estoppel—what is it?Unlike the other forms of estoppel (see Practice Note: Estoppel—what,
Community order requirementsCommunity order requirements are set out in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003), as amended by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO 2012) and the Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014 (ORA 2014). Criminal Justice Act 2003, s 152(2)
This Practice Note examines the doctrine of consideration and the key role it plays in English law in determining whether a contract is enforceable.A promise will only be capable of being contractually enforced if it is either made in a deed or made in exchange for something of value, known as
Company directors are not, by virtue only of their office as director, automatically entitled under company law to remuneration for services as a director or to reimbursement of expenses incurred in rendering such services. Power to pay directors remuneration for their services will need to be
0330 161 1234