Employment Lawyers: Effective Date of Termination of Employment
Strict time limitations on employment claims means the whole success of your claim could be dependant on the disputed date of your termination of employment. The matter can get further complicated by letters not being read as straight away.
This has commonly been the case with dismissals, where letters sent have not been read immediately on arrival due to individuals being away on holiday. Case law suggests that the employment tribunal would decide in favour of... Read full blog on London Lawyers
Latest employment law news from the United Kingdom
Showing posts with label employment law advice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label employment law advice. Show all posts
Friday, December 3, 2010
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Employment Law in Dubai: Work hard Pay hard?!
 |
| Laura Beament |
Employment law specialist law firm in London and Essex Bains Cohen Solicitor has prepared a summary of relevant employment law in Dubai for the benefit of its expat clients.
What is its role?
Employment Law in Dubai is in fact called Labour Law, but has exactly the same function as Employment Law in England – i.e. it is the employee’s rights which take priority. So you probably know more about it than you think! Labour Law covers every aspect of employer and employee relations, (treatment at work, pay, hours of work, leave, benefits, holiday, etc) and cannot be overridden by employment contracts. Read More on Employment law in Dubai
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Age Discrimination
In 2 recent cases the European Court of Justice looked at issues of age discrimination and found that in some circumstances it might be justify to discriminate on grounds of age.
In the first case, Wolf (Social policy) [2010] EUECJ C-229/08, The European Court of Justice ruled in certain circumstances age discrimination could be justified where the employer can show evidence that physical fitness was an essential requirement in carrying out the tasks at hand. In this case the European Court of Justice ruled in favour of the German fire service which required all its applicants to be under the age of 30.
This was on the basis that fire-fighters were involved in activities of fire fighting and rescue and that the physical fitness of its applicants was an essential element of carrying out their duties. The European Court of Justice therefore decided that the imposition of the age limit was a proportionate measure.
In the second case, Petersen (Social policy) [2010] EUECJ C-341/08
the court made a preliminary ruling that a maximum age limit of 68 for dentists working in publicly funded practice is potentially justified as a means of providing opportunities for younger dentists to find work in the health service. Interestingly, the court ruled that it would not have been acceptable to set the age limit on the grounds of protection of public health. This was because in private practices there was not an age limit for working dentists.
In the first case, Wolf (Social policy) [2010] EUECJ C-229/08, The European Court of Justice ruled in certain circumstances age discrimination could be justified where the employer can show evidence that physical fitness was an essential requirement in carrying out the tasks at hand. In this case the European Court of Justice ruled in favour of the German fire service which required all its applicants to be under the age of 30.
This was on the basis that fire-fighters were involved in activities of fire fighting and rescue and that the physical fitness of its applicants was an essential element of carrying out their duties. The European Court of Justice therefore decided that the imposition of the age limit was a proportionate measure.
In the second case, Petersen (Social policy) [2010] EUECJ C-341/08
the court made a preliminary ruling that a maximum age limit of 68 for dentists working in publicly funded practice is potentially justified as a means of providing opportunities for younger dentists to find work in the health service. Interestingly, the court ruled that it would not have been acceptable to set the age limit on the grounds of protection of public health. This was because in private practices there was not an age limit for working dentists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)