Please sign in with your existing account details.
Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.
Privacy statement - Terms and conditions
Forgotten your password?
You have exceeded the maximum number of login attempts for this email address and your account has been locked. An email has been sent to member of Browne Jacobson's web team and some one will be contacting you over the next two working days with details of how to change your password.
Are you sure you want to remove this item from you pinned content?
In USDAW v Woolworths, Lyttle v Bluebird, and Canas v Nexea Advocate General Wahl considered the meaning of the term ‘establishment’ in Article 1 (1) (a) (ii) of the EU Collective Redundancies Directive 98/59. The question was whether the obligation to consult arises when the overall total of proposed redundancy dismissals is at least 20 across all of an employer’s establishments or whether the total must be at least 20 at each establishment.
The Advocate General held that ‘establishment’ must have a consistent meaning across the Directive. He considers ‘establishment’ to be the unit which the redundant employees are assigned to carry out their duties and it is not necessary to aggregate dismissals across all of an employer’s establishments to determine whether the Directive protections apply. He added that what is a local employment unit is a question of fact to be determined by national courts.
This opinion is not binding on the full ECJ, but is likely to be highly influential. The ECJ should rule on the question later in the year.
A convenience retailer has opted to install cameras (the “Facewatch” system) at a limited number of its English stores to reduce crime and protect its staff.
View blog
The Government appears set to announce plans on ‘living with Covid to restore freedom’. With the success of the retail and hospitality sector key to recovery, what protections will be on offer to tenants to deal with Covid-19 rent arrears?
Break rights have proved a fertile source of litigation over the last few years. More often than not, tenants have found themselves on the wrong end of the decisions. However, a Court of Appeal decision yesterday has bucked that trend.
One of the requirements for tenants to contract out of the security of tenure regime contained in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is that they make a simple or statutory declaration before entering into the lease.
Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.
Sign up