- Lexis®PSL Employment weekly highlights—19 May 2016
- In this issue:
- When high heels make the headlines—should employers be concerned?
- Headlines (News updates & analysis)
- Orders restricting litigants when applications are 'totally without merit'
- Equality Act 2010: mutuality of obligation is relevant to employee status
- The proper approach when deciding whether a particular belief is protected
- Enforcement of a contractual right to 'check off' by employees and their union
- EHRC issues guide to business and human rights
- Queen's Speech 2016: Bill of Rights
- Relevant updates from other practice areas
- Dates for your diary
This week’s edition of Employment highlights includes: (1) an exploration of why employers should consider the implications of their dress code policies following last week’s headline news about high heels, by Scott Milligan, associate at Harper Macleod LLP, (2) analysis of the Court of Appeal’s judgment on the relevance of mutuality of obligation in the determination of whether someone who works on an assignment-by-assignment basis is an employee for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, (3) an EAT judgment on how employment tribunals should approach the question of whether unusual beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010, (4) a High Court judgment on civil restraint orders and vexatious litigants, (5) a High Court judgment on the contractual right of employees and their union to require an employer to operate the deduction of union subscriptions from salary (check-off), (6) the EHRC’s new five-step guide to human rights for company boards, (7) the Immigration Act 2016 (which received Royal Assent on 12 May 2016), (8) updates to our case and legislation trackers, and (9) dates for your diary.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial