The Latest from Cloisters

News, Publications, Policies, Events and Blogs

Six Cloisters’ Silks join panel of 22 QCs on the hot employment law issues for 2016-2017

Six Cloisters’ Silks join panel of 22 QCs on the hot employment law issues for 2016-2017
Robin Allen QCDaphne Romney QCPaul Epstein QCJason Galbraith-Marten QCCaspar Glyn QC and Rachel Crasnow QC  will be part of the panel of 22 of the UK’s leading Queen’s Counsel who will update delegates  on key employment law topics that are most likely to be of concern in 2016-17.

Date: Thursday & Friday 29 -30 September 2016.

Venue: The Strand Palace Hotel, London, WC2R 0JJ.

Day 1: Thursday 29 September 2016

Paul’s morning session will cover ‘Data protection and employment law: recent developments’. This session will look at the implications of data protection for employment law and HR practice, including the 2016 EU General Data Protection Regulation, what is personal data, when there is an obligation to disclose personal data or data relating to third parties and the new Privacy Shield framework.

Daphne will speak just before lunch and her session will cover ‘Equal pay and gender pay gap reporting’. During this conference, the mandatory gender pay gap reporting regulations are expected to come into force. Daphne’s session will explain the main new obligation on employers and the changes that were made from the consultative draft regulations. We will also look at the latest equal pay case law.

Rachel’s afternoon session will be on ‘Associative discrimination and perceived discrimination’. Associative discrimination is an expanding area: from the CHEZ decision by the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice, ruling that the equal treatment principle applies not to a particular category of person but by reference to the grounds of discrimination, to EAD Solicitors v Abrams (corporate bodies) and  Thompson v London Central Bus Company which applies associative discrimination in the victimisation sphere. In contrast, the scope for developing the basis for perceived disability discrimination remains narrow. This session will consider recent decisions and ask how hard should it be to prove perceived disability in comparison to actual disability?

Day 2: Friday 30 September 2016

Robin will begin the afternoon on the second day of the conference with his talk on ‘Reasonable adjustments for disability: a changing landscape’. The Court of Appeal’s decision in Griffiths v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions raised the central issue of whether absence management policies need to be modified to comply with the duty of reasonable adjustment. The interrelationship between TUPE and the Equality Act’s reasonable adjustment provisions was explored by the EAT in NHS Direct NHS Trust v Gunn. The Supreme Court will be hearing Paulley v First Group on a service provider’s reasonable adjustment duty.

Jason’s session, just before tea, will update delegates on the issue of ‘Vicarious liability’. The Supreme Court’s decisions in Cox v Ministry of Justice and Mohamud v W M Morrison Supermarkets have the effect of extending an employer’s vicarious liability for wrongdoing by its employees. Gallop v Newport City Council (No.2) is the latest authority on employer liability for discrimination.

Finally, Caspar will close the conference with ‘Current working time issues’. Since our last 22 QCs conference, the EAT has issued its decision in British Gas Trading v Lock (No.2) on holiday pay and results-based commission payments. InM’bye v Stiftelsen Fossumkollektivet the EFTA Court considered the implications of an employer imposing an 84-hour working week in a nursing home. We will also look at pending references before the Court of Justice relating to on-call time and to holiday pay.

This two day conference will be of interest to all those advising on employment law issues. It is accredited 11 CPD points (5.5 hours/day).

For booking details click here.

For more information, contact
Michael Rubenstein Publishing Ltd
T: 0844 800 1863
E: 

Part 1: the Prevent Duty for Universities
The legal consequences of illegality: The Supreme ...