Articles

The judgment in For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16 was given on 16 April 2025, making headlines in the national press and internationally. Katherine Anderson considers the practical implications for employers.

Mark Green reviews the case of Mr A E Madu v Loughborough College [2025] EAT 52, in which HHJ Tayler provides useful guidance on costs applications in discrimination cases and underlines that litigants in person on the other end of a costs application may need special consideration.

Michael Smith on F v J [2025] EAT 34, in which the EAT found that the Employment Tribunal had applied the wrong legal test, set the evidential bar too high, and failed to give due weight to the Claimant’s reasonable concerns regarding future professional harm when assessing their application for anonymity.

What is the approach to be taken when a claimant seeks to amend their claim while still within the primary limitation period for the events which the amendment concerns? Alex Leonhardt analyses the case of Barbosa Dethling v The Metropolitan Police Service [2025] EAT 58, in which HHJ Auerbach considered this question.

Andrew Duncan recently acted in a case concerning a young person who sought to change their forename. In Re C (A child)(Change of Given Name) [2024] EWCA Civ 1582 the child also expressed a wish to change their surname, but this was not actively pursued, and the guardian had not reported on its merits.

Andrew writes about this case for Family Law Week. Click below to read the article.

Gareth Graham analyses the case of Impact Recruitment Services Ltd v Korpysa [2025] EAT 22, which results in the EAT reinforcing the relatively low threshold for what counts as a substantial reason for SOSR dismissals.

An employer’s genuinely held but mistaken belief that an employee has resigned may be sufficient to establish a potentially fair reason for dismissal. However, the dismissal may nonetheless be unfair if the employer did not act reasonably in treating the employment as terminated for that reason.

Strike Out Season
Colin McDevitt summarises the key aspects of four recent decisions on strike out:

W v Highways England and others, 18th February 2025, [2025] EAT 18, Lord Fairley
Kostrova v McDermott International INC and CB&I UK Ltd, 13th March 2025, [2025] EAT 35, Lord Fairley
Kamphues v Venator Materials UK Ltd, 19th March 2025, [2025] EAT 30, HHJ Tayler
Kinch v Compassion in World Farming International, 26th March 2025, [2025] EAT 41, Lord Fairley.

Matthew Curtis reviews the case of Gourlay v West Dunbartonshire Council [2025] EAT 29, in which the EAT reminds practitioners that the harm that would have been caused by a hypothetical lawful dismissal has to be the same as that caused by an unfair dismissal for compensation to be reduced.

The case also outlines the need for expert evidence when arguing that ill health retirement would have occurred in any event.

Joseph England analyses Kau Media Group Ltd v Hart [2025] EWHC 553 (KB), a case that highlights the importance of making sure there is evidence to back up the apparent justification contained in often hastily prepared pleadings.

The case also offers a specific analysis of the digital marketing industry, with the covenants’ length and scope providing useful comparisons against an individual case.

Naomi Webber and Alex Leonhardt analyse the long-anticipated judgment in Higgs v Farmor’s School handed down by the Court of Appeal in February, a judgment which offers pertinent lessons for practitioners representing student/parents, schools and universities, where questions of balancing freedom of speech, institutional reputation and the rights of others frequently come into play.

Alice de Coverley reviews the case of B v St Dominic’s Grammar School: [2025] UKUT 048 (AAC), in which Judge Stout provides clear guidance on how further parts of section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 are to be interpreted, clarifying how the shifting burden of proof applies to both the reason for unfavourable treatment and the ‘something arising’ from disability.

Ben Amunwa predicts a groundswell of systemic legal challenges - including but not limited to judicial reviews - on a range of social and economic issues affecting the education sector.