Law Commission’s Proposals for Reform of Right to Manage for Leaseholders


Alexandra Mitchell, Solicitor at Berry Smith, considers the recent changes proposed by The Law Commission to the RTM legislation.

Changes have been proposed by The Law Commission to make it less complicated for leaseholders to obtain control of the day to day management of their buildings in England and Wales. They have released a 3 month consultation on how to alter the way leaseholders apply for the “right to manage” (RTM).

Advocate General’s Opinion: Recording Hours Worked


In the case of Federación de Servicios de Comisiones Obreras (CCOO) v Deutsche Bank SAE, Advocate General Pitruzzella provided his opinion that under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the EU Working Time Directive, employers should keep records of actual daily hours worked for full-time workers who have not expressly agreed to work overtime.

Employee Status: The Right To Use A Substitute


In the case of Chatfield-Roberts v Phillips & Universal Aunts Limited, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) held that the right to use a substitute can be consistent with employee status.

The Claimant worked as a live-in carer for the first Respondent’s uncle, Colonel Henry Brooke. The second Respondent, Universal Aunts Limited was an agency that introduced the Claimant to the first Respondent.

Anonymity Orders


In the case of Ameyaw v PWC, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) held that the Employment Tribunal (“ET”) does not have the power to remove judgements from the on-line public register.

The Claimant, Miss Ameyaw, applied to have a previous ET judgment, removed from the public register, or in the alternative she asked for her name to be anonymised (an Anonymity Order under Rule 50 of the ET Rules).

Disability Discrimination: Constructive Knowledge and The Duty to Make Reasonable Adjustments


In the case of Lamb v The Garrard Academy, the Employment Tribunal (“ET”) erred in determining that an employee off sick for four months with PTSD was not disabled.

The Claimant, Ms Lamb had worked for the Respondent, The Garrard Academy as a teacher. In March 2012, the Claimant raised two grievances and despite being investigated by the Head of HR, the Respondent’s Chief Executive decided in July 2012 that the investigation was inadequate and should be commenced entirely from scratch.

Direct Age Discrimination: Firefighters’ Pension Schemes


In the case of Secretary of State for the Home Department and others v Sargeant and others, the Court of Appeal (“CA”) held that transitional provisions in firefighters’ pension schemes were directly age discriminatory.

The Firefighters’ Pension Scheme 1992 was closed to new members on 1 April 2006. Existing members continued to gain benefits under the 1992 scheme but new members joined the Firefighters Pension Scheme 2006. The Firefighters’ Pension Scheme 2015 (FPS 2015) was introduced on 1 April 2015.

Extending Redundancy Protection for Women and New Parents


In March 2016, the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) and the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) carried out research into pregnancy and maternity issues at work.  It revealed that 77% of women reported negative experiences at work related to their pregnancy or maternity. In addition, research carried out by the Women and Equalities Select Committee (WESC) in August 2016 reported that the number of expectant and new mothers forced to leave their jobs had almost doubled since 2005.

Extension of Time to Appeal Granted Where Appeal Exceeded Email Size Limit


In the case of J v K and another, the Court of Appeal (“CA”) granted an extension of time to appeal as the Appellant had not been notified that the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) could not accept emails exceeding 10MB.

Appeals must be received by the EAT no later than 42 days from the date the written reasons are sent out by the tribunal. In addition, the EAT must receive the appeal by 4:00pm on the last day.

Partnering up

Q. I have read in the newspaper that siblings could soon enter into civil partnerships. Is this correct?

A. Currently, under the Civil Partnership Act 2004, two people of the same sex may be registered as civil partners. Prior to the implementation of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013, registration as civil partners was the only option in England and Wales for same sex couples wishing to enjoy many of the same privileges as married couples.