Carrying out a reasonable investigation into a misconduct allegation – can an employer withhold evidence from a disciplinary panel? | Employment Law Blog

The case of Hargreaves v Manchester Grammar serves as a useful reminder for employers of how to carry out a reasonable investigation, particularly when the employee in question is facing potentially career changing consequences as a result of the allegations. In this case the Employment Appeal Tribunal decided that it was reasonable for the employer to withhold the evidence of potential witnesses who “had seen nothing” – the Tribunal had been entitled to make this finding and reject the employee’s claim of unfair dismissal.   Background Mr Hargreaves was employed…

Scotching Brexit? Background to the Wightman case about reversing the Article 50 notification unilaterally

Alan S. Reid, Senior Lecturer in Law, Sheffield Hallam University. The author welcomes comments on the blog at a.s.reid@shu.ac.uk As the Brexit clock ticks down, and the diametrically opposed objectives of Theresa May’s negotiating imperatives become ever more exposed, the clamour to clarify the processes and procedures surrounding Brexit intensifies. At the tail end of 2017, a group of seven Scottish politicians, from across the political spectrum and from all three legislatures for Scotland (the Scottish Parliament, the UK Parliament and the European Parliament) commenced an action in the Scottish…

The extension of the SMCR, the fit & proper test and the increasing significance of non-financial misconduct | Employment Law Blog

The FCA has been determined to drive cultural change in financial services for some years now. Since the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards published their seminal report ‘Changing banking for good’ in 2013 there has been a concerted drive to improve the culture of financial services, to avoid future financial scandals, and ensure accountability and responsibility for risk management, compliance and wrongdoing from the top down. This has seen the introduction of the Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SMCR) – currently applicable to UK and foreign branch office banks, building…

CJEU case law on EU citizenship: normatively consistent? Unlikely! – A response to Davies’ ‘Has the Court changed, or have the cases?’

Alexander Hoogenboom, PhD, MSc. LL.M. Senior Policy Officer at the Dutch Healthcare Authority and associate researcher at the Institute for Transnational and Euregional cross border cooperation and Mobility, Faculty of law, Maastricht University. The position taken in this paper solely reflects the views of the author. Introduction Recent case law of the Court of Justice on EU citizens’ access to benefits has been seen by some as a restrictive turn compared to prior case law, in response to a rise in populism. However, the article by Davies in a recent…

An analysis of the K. & B. ruling of the CJEU

EU Law Analysis: The effectiveness of the right to family reunion of refugees: An analysis of the K. & B. ruling of the CJEU The effectiveness of the right to family reunion of refugees: An analysis of the K. & B. ruling of the CJEU Mark Klaassen, Assistant professor at the Institute of Immigration Law at Leiden University For most EU Member States (the UK, Ireland and Denmark have opted out), family reunion between non-EU citizens residing on their territory and their non-EU citizen family members living abroad is governed…

You can teach a new court Mangold tricks – the horizontal effect of the Charter right to paid annual leave

Filippo Fontanelli, Senior Lecturer in International Economic Law, University of Edinburgh On 6 November 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the Court) delivered three judgments relating to paid annual leave. Some of its remarks transcend the specific topic, and touch on constitutional matters: the impact of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights on private parties, the allocation of competences between the EU and the Member States, and the application of EU secondary law. These cases teach a couple of lessons, and raise a wider point. The lessons…

EU Law Analysis: Harassment of Human Rights Defenders: Measuring Democracy, Bad Faith and Hidden Agendas

EU Law Analysis: Harassment of Human Rights Defenders: Measuring Democracy, Bad Faith and Hidden Agendas – What Role for the European Court of Human Rights? Harassment of Human Rights Defenders: Measuring Democracy, Bad Faith and Hidden Agendas – What Role for the European Court of Human Rights? Marco Antonio Simonelli, PhD candidate, University of Siena, and Alast Najafi, LLM candidate, University of Leiden In its recent judgment of Aliyev v. Azerbaijan, the European Court of Human Rights (hereafter the Court) activated anew the long dormant Article 18 ECHR (which provides…

A tale of “paraDublin activity”?

EU Law Analysis: The Case of the Administrative Arrangement on Asylum-Seekers between Greece and Germany: A tale of “paraDublin activity”? The Case of the Administrative Arrangement on Asylum-Seekers between Greece and Germany: A tale of “paraDublin activity”? Stathis Poularakis, Legal advisor – Advocacy Officer Médecins du Monde – Greece* *An earlier version of this article was published in Greek on immigration.gr blog. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Médecins du Monde –…

Freedom to insult? Balancing freedom of expression with religious tolerance in ECHR case law

Professor Steve Peers, University of Essex A recent judgment of the European Court of Human Rights has raised again the question of whether there should be limits on free speech when someone might be offended by it – in this case, concerning the Muslim faith. It’s a good opportunity to explain the context of the case and assess what – if any – limits should be acceptable on free speech in such cases. The saga of ES v Austria began at a public seminar on “Basic Information on Islam” organised…

the CJEU gives its first interim measures ruling on the rule of law in Poland

Daniel Sarmiento,  Professor of EU Law at the University Complutense of Madrid* The decision of 19 October of the Vice-President of the Court of Justice, ordering the Republic of Poland to suspend the effects of the Judiciary Reform Act and, in particular, to ensure that no sitting judge is removed as a result of the new retirement age, is revolutionary to say the least. The Court has entered a terra incognita, a place where no previous European court had ever entered into, forcing a sovereign Member State to choose between its membership…