News 📰
Neonatal Care Leave and Pay
Since the new statutory entitlements to Neonatal Care Leave and Pay came into effect on 6 April 2025, Acas have published guidance to assist employers to ensure that they are meeting their responsibilities. The government has also published guidance which highlights both employee and employer responsibilities and rights.
Some of the basic rights that employees have if they are planning to take or during their Neonatal Care Leave are:
- Protection from dismissal;
- Protection from detriment;
- (Conditional) Right to return to the same job; and
- Protection from redundancy.
For the full guidance, click here.
Presenting claims, responses and statutory appeals in the Employment Tribunal
A new Practice Direction was issued on 16 April 2025 in relation to presenting claims, responses and statutory appeals in the Employment Tribunal, to take effect immediately after midnight on 20 May 2025.
An important theme running throughout the Practice Directions is in relation to the use of emails:
- Eliminating the use of emails when Respondents are submitting their ET3 response; and
- Introducing the use of emails to present a claim to the Employment Tribunal.
NB: The use of email for either of the above will only be allowed in exceptional circumstances (i.e. where there is a fault with the online submission service, with the error message captured in a screenshot) and will only be accepted to a designated email address.
Parties are expected otherwise to:
- Use the online submission service provided by HMCTS: Claims & Responses.
- Send the prescribed form to the Employment Tribunal Central Office, PO Box 11225, Loughborough, LE11 9PX
- Hand deliver the prescribed form to one of the ten ET offices in England and Wales, as listed in the schedule to the Practice Direction.
In support of the new Practice Direction, Respondents who are unrepresented are now able to submit digital applications to the Employment Tribunal, using the Citizen Portal. Read more here.
Recordings of hearings
There is now the ability for all hearings to be recorded at any Employment Tribunal in England and Wales. This is in accordance with the Practice Direction issued back in November 2023.
CEST tool amendments
The Check Employment Status for Tax (‘CEST’) tool is used to determine the employment status of an individual for tax purposes. As stated by HMRC, the CEST tool can be used by:
- A hirer;
- Workers; and
- Agencies or third parties
There have previously been concerns raised in relation to HMRC not expressly having a question addressing whether there is mutuality of obligation when determining how a taxpayer reviews their employment status. One of the questions added in to the CEST tool, is now whether there is (or will be) a contract in place, reducing any confusion. For more information, please visit the government website here.
Case Law Update 📢
For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers
A significant judicial decision has recently been made by the Supreme Court which undoubtedly you will have read about or see: This was in relation to the legal definition of a ‘woman’ within the Equality Act 2010, where it was decided that a transgender woman who holds a Gender Recognition Certificate (‘GRC’) was not deemed to fall within that definition of a ‘woman’.
There was an appeal submitted to the Supreme Court by ‘For Women Scotland Ltd’ against a decision made about statutory guidance issued under the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, which stated that the definition of ‘woman’ in the 2018 Act included transgender women holding a GRC, and was the same as defined in the Equality Act 2010 for the purposes of the 2018 Act.
The Supreme Court held that the definition of ‘sex’, ‘man’ and ‘woman’ in the Equality Act 2010 is intended to mean biological sex.
The Supreme Court has highlighted that transgender people are still protected from discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 through laws relating to gender reassignment, indirect and direct discrimination and harassment.
Since the ruling by the Supreme Court in this case, Victoria McCloud, a retired transgender judge, has intimated an intention to challenge the decision in the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that the decision violates her rights under Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights. She had initially applied for leave to join the Supreme Court case, but her application for such leave was rejected.
We will shortly be issuing guidance regarding considerations that may need to be made as a result of the judgment.
ABC v Huntercombe (No 12) Ltd and others
We usually bring you details of judgments from the Employment Tribunal or Employment Appeal Tribunal, but today we share details of an interesting High Court judgment.
In this case, the Claimant (referred to as ABC due to an anonymity order being granted) claimed damages for injuries that she suffered during her time as a patient at hospital. Her injuries were sustained due to the actions of two employees of the hospital. At that time, the hospital was owned by Huntercombe (No 12) Ltd (‘the Transferor’). However, the employment of the two employees was subsequently transferred to a second company, Active Young People Ltd (‘the Transferee’), by way of a TUPE transfer.
The High Court decided that the Transferor’s vicarious liability for the torts (wrongs) committed by its employees prior to the TUPE transfer did not pass to the Transferee.
The purpose of the TUPE Regulations is to safeguard the rights of transferring employees. The Transferee will acquire rights or liabilities that have arisen under or in connection with the employee’s contract with the Transferor. Since vicarious liability involves liability to a third party (rather than directly between the parties to the employment contract), it is too ‘remote’ a liability to transfer under TUPE.