Items with the keyword psychiatric_injury
- Liability and compensation - Case Round-Up: December 2018In this month's case round-up, Mark Shulman, consultant solicitor with Keystone Law, looks at recent cases covering compensation for whistleblowing detriment, reasonable foreseeability and psychiatric injury, and the principles for establishing for vicarious liability. (05/12/2018) • resource • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Piepenbrock v LSE [2018] EWHC 2572 (QB)Claim for damages for psychiatric injury arising from harassment of the Claimant by one of the Defendant's other employees. Claim dismissed.(19/11/2018) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd v Konczak [2017] EWCA Civ 1188Appeal against the compensation awarded to the Claimant after she won her claims of sex and disability discrimination and victimisation. This is an important case in which divisible and indivisible harm is discussed in detail. Appeal dismissed.(01/08/2017) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- De Souza v Vinci Construction (UK) Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 879Appeal against a decision by the ET, and upheld by the EAT, that the Simmons v Castle 10% uplift does not apply to awards for injury to feelings. Appeal allowed.(11/07/2017) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- De Souza v Vinci Construction UK Ltd UKEAT/0328/14/DXAAppeal against the application of 10% uplift to one part of the claimant's award but not the other as laid down by Simmons v Castle. Cross-appeal against the application of the uplift to one part of the award. Appeal dismissed and cross-appeal allowed.(21/03/2015) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Yapp v Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2014] EWCA Civ 1512Appeal against findings of breach of contract and breach of the duty of care, and that, even if there were a breach, the claimant was not entitled to a sum for psychiatric injury. Appeal allowed in respect of the breach of duty of care.(24/11/2014) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
- Osei-Adjei v RM Education Ltd (Formerly RM Education Plc) UKEAT/0461/12/JOJAppeal against the level of award made after the claimant's successful claim that the respondent had failed to make reasonable adjustments for his disability. Cross-appeal against the level of award in respect of psychiatric injury. Appeal dismissed, cross-appeal allowed in part.(30/09/2013) • case • CPD: 0/0 mins
7 items
