|
 Practice
Area Classification:
Discrimination.
Name: Barker v Westbridge International Ltd.
Cite: BLD 130600919.
Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal.
Judge: Judge Peter Clark, Mr P Jacques and Miss D Whittingham.
Hearing Date: 8 June 2000.
Representation: Rachel Crasnow for the applicant. Mr K
Cadoo of First Assist Group Ltd for the respondent.
Legislation Considered: Disability Discrimination Act 1995, s 1.
Annotations: H J Heinz Co Ltd v Kenrick [2000] IRLR 144
followed; O’Neill v Symm & Co Ltd [1998] IRLR 233 not
followed; Greenwood v British Airways plc [1999] IRLR 600 applied.
Outline: Discrimination on ground of disability—Whether
applicant disabled. For the purposes of the Disability Discrimination
Act 1995, s 1, the relevant date for determining whether the applicant
suffered a disability was the date of termination of employment, not the
date on which the notice of dismissal is given. Furthermore, the
respondent employer’s knowledge that the applicant was suffering from a
disability as at that date was irrelevant at the s 1 stage and the
tribunal, with the benefit of hindsight, was entitled to take into account
all the evidence before them at the hearing to determine whether, at the
date of termination, it was likely that the adverse effect of the
impairment would last for at least 12 months from the date of the injury
with the result that it could be considered "long term".
Practice
Area Classification: Practice
and Procedure.
Name: Kapadia v Lambeth London Borough Council.
Cite: BLD 130600922.
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division.
Judge: Pill, Schiemann LJJ and Sir Murray Stuart Smith.
Hearing Date: 9 June 2000.
Representation: Sam Neaman (instructed by Copley Clark
& Bennett, Sutton) for the claimant. Dijen Basu (instructed
by Geb Curran) for the council.
Outline: Evidence—Expert evidence. Once a claimant and his
solicitors consent to an examination by a doctor chosen by the other party,
there is no requirement for any further consent by them before disclosure to
the other party of the medical report prepared consequent to that
examination. To allow a medical practitioner a veto on disclosure on the
ground that the claimant has not consented to it would constitute an
impediment to the fair and expeditious conduct of the litigation as good
practice requires disclosure of such reports for use in court.
Practice Area Classification: Companies.
Name: Re Britania Homes Centres Ltd.
Cite: BLD 130600921.
Court: Chancery Division.
Judge: Richard Mawrey QC sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court.
Hearing Date: 7 June 2000.
Representation: Guy Newey (instructed by Howes Percival,
Norwich) for the Official Receiver. M appeared in person.
Legislation Considered: Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986,
s 17; Insolvent Companies (Disqualification of Unfit Directors) Proceedings
Rules 1987, SI 1987/2023.
Outline: Director—Disqualification. On a true construction
of the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 and SI 1987/2023, an
appeal from a decision of a District Judge granting or refusing leave to act
as a director, lay to the High Court and not to the County Court.
Practice Area Classification: Children and
Young Persons.
Name: Protection of Children Act 1999 (Commencement No 1) Order 2000.
Number: SI 2000/1459.
Enabling Power: Protection of Children Act 1999, s 14(2).
Outline: Brings into force on 5 June 2000 the Protection of Children
Act 1999, s 3(1), (2), which relate to the inclusion of individuals in the
list kept by the Secretary of State for the purposes of s 1 of the Act on
transfer from the Consultancy Service Index.
|
|
 EAT
decision on discrimination
Court
of Appeal decision on practice and procedure
Chancery
Division decision on companies
Protection
of Children Act 1999 (Commencement No 1) Order 2000
European Court of Human Rights: two new
decisions
click
here for today's public law update
DTI consults on landlord rights
click
here for today's property law update
EU: Internal Market Commissioner comments on
deadlines for integrated securities and capital markets
click
here for today's company/commercial update
National Savings Bank (Investment Deposits)
(Limits) (Amendment) Order 2000: SI 2000/1421
click
here for today's company/commercial update
click here to find out more about the many other
services in law direct |
