In Ajaz v Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employment judge erred in concluding that rule 52 of the Tribunal Rules 2013 prevented the claimant from raising new whistleblowing detriment claims after earlier detriment claims that were based on the same protected disclosures were dismissed following withdrawal
In Ajaz v Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employment judge erred in concluding that rule 52 of the Tribunal Rules 2013 prevented the claimant from raising new whistleblowing detriment claims after earlier detriment claims that were based on the same protected disclosures were dismissed following withdrawal
Une récente décision (la Décision) rendue par l’arbitre Me François Hamelin (l’Arbitre)[1] confirme qu’au Québec, la dénonciation d’une pratique passée (utilisée comme moyen d’interprétation d’une disposition ambiguë d’une convention collective) n’a aucun effet en l’absence d’une modification, par négociation, du texte en cause. À notre connaissance, il s’agit de la première décision
In the recent decision of Viterra v Grain Services Union, 2013 SKCA 93 the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal reaffirmed the power of arbitrators to hold parties to past practice in applying a collective agreement through the doctrine of estoppel.
This case considered the employer’s long-standing practice of paying of paying certain groups of employees