January
On 7 January 2019 the Court of Appeal will hear the appeal in BMC Software Ltd v Shaikh, considering whether an employer's breach of the implied sex equality clause could constitute constructive dismissal.
Later in January, the Court of Appeal will hear the appeal in Agoreyo v London Borough of Lambeth, in which it will consider whether the suspension of a teacher accused of having used unreasonable force against children, purportedly to allow a fair investigation to take place, constituted a repudiatory breach of contract.
On 21 and 22 January 2019, the Supreme Court will hear the appeal in Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd, in which the Court of Appeal found a six-month non-compete restrictive covenant to be invalid. The restriction, which sought to prevent a former employee from being concerned or interested in any competing business, was deemed impermissibly wide because the phrase "interested in" included holding one share in a publicly quoted company. This will be the first case involving construction of an employment restrictive covenant to be decided by the Supreme Court (or the House of Lords) in over a century.
February
Chief Constable of Norfolk v Coffey, which will be heard by the Court of Appeal, is the first case to directly address the issue of direct discrimination based on perceived disability under the Equality Act 2010.
The Court of Appeal will hear the appeal in Bamieh v Foreign and Commonwealth Office, following the EAT's ruling that an employment tribunal had territorial jurisdiction to hear whistleblowing claims brought by an employee of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office against two colleagues regarding alleged events which took place while all three were on secondment to an EU Mission in Kosovo.
April
The Court of Appeal will hear the appeal in Kocur v Angard Staffing Solutions Ltd, in which it will consider the interpretation of regulation 5(1) of the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 which gives agency workers "the same basic working and employment conditions" as permanent employees after 12 weeks.
X v Y (a case about the retraction of legal advice privilege where there is a strong unambiguous case of injustice) is expected to be heard by the Court of Appeal on 2 October 2019. In this case the email suggested “cloaking” discrimination in a redundancy exercise.
Finally, we can expect the Supreme Court to hear the appeal in Uber BV and others v Aslam, in which the Court of Appeal recently held, by majority, that Uber drivers are workers. The Court of Appeal gave Uber permission to appeal.
For help and advice on employment matters please contact Emma-Louise Hewitt on 0808 166 8827 or email e.hewitt@sydneymitchell.co.uk
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
