On 6 October 2015, the PRA and the FCA published parallel policy statements containing rules on whistleblowing in financial institutions.
As part of the wider move towards greater accountability in the financial and insurance sectors, and ahead of the new Senior Managers regime coming into effect in March 2016, a joint consultation paper on regulatory references was issued by the PRA and the FCA on 6 October 2015.
As has been well-publicised, the US ‘Safe Harbour’ principles have been found to be insufficient protection against breaches of human rights occurring when data is transferred out of the EU to the USA.
A recent decision has confirmed that it is possible for a corporate body to be the victim of discrimination within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010.
The government has published its response to the consultation over plans to cap public sector exit payments at £95,000.
A case brought by a former domestic servant against her employers has established for the first time that a person may be treated as discriminated against on grounds of race where the derogatory treatment is connected to their caste status.
An employee who had been unable to work due to illness for 6 years and would not be returning to work was not assigned to the group transferring under TUPE, so his employment did not carry over to the incoming employer. The employee was simply ‘on the books’ in order to continue to receive permanent health insurance, therefore lacking the necessary involvement in the work being done by the transferring team to be regarded as part of it.
An employee was unfairly dismissed in circumstances where heavy influence from the Human Resources department had led to the investigating officer changing his recommendation from a final warning to immediate dismissal.
Victimising an employee for being associated with allegations of discrimination by others is unlawful
It is possible for a victimisation claim to succeed where a person is treated less favourably because someone else has made an allegation of discrimination and in the employer’s mind the two people are associated. There is no need for any actual connection between the person who made the allegation and the person who suffers as a result of it so long as the employer perceives them as associated.
The courts will not enforce compliance with a data subject access request (also referred to as a DSAR) where compliance would not be reasonable or the search would require disproportionate effort. The motive for submitting the data subject access request will also be relevant to the court’s decision.