Search
Searching Content indexed under Employment Litigation/ Tribunals by Daniel Westman ordered by Published Date Descending.
Links to Result pages
 
1  
 
Title
Country
Organisation
Author
Date
1
The Ninth Circuit Allows Corporate Counsel To Bring SOX Whistleblower Claims; Belief That Investigation Required Satisfies The Statute
In its first decision interpreting the whistleblower provisions of SOX, the Ninth Circuit broadened the scope of protected conduct. Although other circuits have required a would-be whistleblower to prove she had a reasonable belief that the law had been violated, the Ninth Circuit held that the whistleblower need only believe an investigation is required.
United States
13 Sep 2009
2
Supreme Court Holds That Disparate-Treatment Discrimination Must Be Based Upon Strong Basis In Evidence Of Potential Liability For Disparate Impact Discrimination
In Ricci v. DeStefano, decided on June 29, 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that “race-based action like the City’s in this case is impermissible under Title VII unless the employer can demonstrate a strong basis in evidence that, had it not taken the action, it would have been liable under the disparate-impact statute.”
United States
7 Jul 2009
3
Supreme Court Tightens Rules Regarding Whistleblowers Who Qualify As "Original Sources" Of Public Information In Litigation Under The False Claims Act
The federal False Claims Act allows any person to file a qui tam lawsuit in the name of the United States to recover money obtained by government contractors by fraudulent means, and to keep a percentage of any money recovered. 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733. Persons who file such lawsuits are called "relators" under the statute.
United States
10 Apr 2007
4
Supreme Court Rules That Unlawful Retaliation Under Title VII May Include Actions That Would Not Necessarily Constitute Discrimination
In today’s unanimous opinion in Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White (No. 05-259), the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff may pursue a retaliation claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if the "employer’s challenged action would have been material to a reasonable employee," and likely would have "dissuaded a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination."
United States
27 Jun 2006
5
Supreme Court Rules That Public Employee´s Performance of Job Duties Alone Is Not Protected Speech Under the First Amendment
In today’s 5 to 4 opinion in Garcetti v. Ceballos (No. 04-473) authored by Justice Kennedy and joined by Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, the Supreme Court held that government employees who "make statements pursuant to their official duties" do not engage in speech protected under the First Amendment.
United States
14 Jun 2006
6
Employment Law Commentary -June 2005
Three years after the whistleblower provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 were passed, it has become clear that litigation of Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower cases differs in several critical respects from litigation of other employment disputes.
United States
21 Jun 2005
Links to Result pages
 
1