- Home
- //
- About
- //
- Our People
- //
- Louise Donaldson
Louise Donaldson
Professional Support Lawyer | London (City)
Louise is the firm’s professional support lawyer. She is an experienced employment lawyer who has worked as a professional support lawyer since 2000. Louise joined Doyle Clayton in 2011, having previously worked in London in large City and national law firms.
Louise is responsible for keeping the team up to date on the latest changes to employment law and provides regular training to the team. She also writes newsletters and bulletins for the firm’s website to help clients stay on top of the changes and understand their business impact.
Louise has extensive experience in all aspects of employment law
What people say about Louise
Louise “went above and beyond to keep us up to date with the wonderful world of Covid 19 guidance and the furlough scheme and other changes.
Colleague
“Her willingness and can do attitude has been much appreciated.”
Colleague
Experience and qualifications
- Qualified in December 1988
- Specialist in Employment Law since 1988
Professional memberships
Employment Lawyers Association (ELA)
PSL Employment Network (PEN)
News
- Labour’s New Deal for Working People
- 25% Protective Award Uplift for Failure to Follow Dismissal and Re-engagement Code
- April 2024 employment law changes: are you ready?
- Flexible Working: all you need to know about the upcoming changes
- Changing Contractual Employment Terms: Dismissal and Re-engagement Code Published
- Unfair dismissal compensation and redundancy payment increases from April
- EU Law Reforms Confirmed: TUPE Consultation and Working Time Record-keeping Obligations
- New legislation on holiday entitlement and pay
- Family friendly rights: an update
- Agency workers to be banned from covering for striking workers (once again)
Cases
- Settlement agreements can settle unknown future claims
- Supreme Court opens the door to more holiday pay claims
- Buyers and incoming service providers beware! Share scheme rights arising outside of the employment contract may transfer under TUPE
- Telephone application ruled a reasonable adjustment for job applicant with dyspraxia
- Failure to consider furlough meant redundancy dismissal was unfair
- Flexible working requests and indirect discrimination
- Covid-19 workplace guidance offers a layer of protection for employers
- Employer liable to pay income protection payments not covered by insurance policy
- Whistleblowing claims: dismissal for way employee blew the whistle not automatically unfair
- Do employers have to provide facilities for employees to express breastmilk?
- Employee with long COVID was disabled
- The without prejudice rule: exaggerated allegations and unambiguous impropriety
- High Court issues injunction halting Tesco’s “fire and rehire” plans
- Pimlico Plumbers lose holiday pay appeal
- Dismissal for raising frivolous and vexatious grievances was fair
- Changing terms of unionised workforces
- Worker or self-employed? What's the difference?
- Employment tribunal wrong to strike out menopause disability discrimination claim
- Office-working requirement discriminated against carer
- Employee’s dismissal for “friction” caused by health and safety activities ruled automatically unfair
- Assessing disability: Impairment must be long-term when discrimination occurs
- Employers can pay more during adoption leave than shared parental leave
- Re-engagement not appropriate where employer doubts employee’s capability
- TUPE service provision change: employees’ contracts can be split between transferees
- Equal pay claims: Retail employees can compare themselves to distribution employees
- Pimlico plumber loses £74,000 holiday pay claim
- End of the road for Uber: Supreme Court rules Uber drivers are workers
- Lack of interim relief remedy for discrimination claims may be unlawful
- Discriminatory pay policy justified by need to balance books
- Health and safety protections extended to workers
- Agency workers: when is a worker supplied temporarily?
- TUPE: Advantageous changes to contractual terms void
- Whistleblowing: employer’s letter setting record straight was a detriment
- Disability must be long-term when discrimination occurs
- Court of Appeal confirms dominant purpose test for legal advice privilege
- Ethical veganism is a protected belief
- Employer cannot hide behind manufactured reason for dismissal adopted by decision-maker
- Sick employees’ right to carry over untaken holiday only applies to Working Time Directive leave
- Whistleblowing protection extended by Supreme Court
- Employer’s covert video surveillance did not breach employees’ privacy rights
- Whistleblowing: disclosures made in defence of poor performance could still be in the public interest
- Vegetarianism and beliefs about transgenderism not protected
- No deemed knowledge of disability as employee hid mental ill-health
- Employer not liable for harassment when employee shared racially offensive Facebook post
- Removing Christian director who spoke out against homosexuality and same-sex adoption was lawful
- Police officer refused transfer wins discrimination claim based on perceived disability
- Northern Irish ruling could lead to employers facing more holiday pay claims
- Refusing overseas posting because of medical concerns not disability discrimination
- Dismissal for discussing religion with patients fair
- Paying women on maternity leave more than men on shared parental leave lawful
- £16,000 injury to feelings compensation for one-off act of harassment
- Employers must have systems for recording daily working hours
- FCA-regulated employee fairly dismissed for not being a “fit and proper person” after misleading employment tribunal
- Injunction preventing employer pursuing disciplinary proceedings in parallel with a police investigation overturned
- Employee entitled to long-term disability benefits until he could return to the same job
- Gay head teacher succeeds in unfair dismissal and discrimination claims due to biased disciplinary process
- Employer’s policies highly relevant when assessing reasonable adjustments
- Dismissal for cohabiting not religious discrimination
- Dismissal due to problem working relationship related to business transfer
- Implied term prevented employer dismissing employee whilst receiving long-term disability benefits
- Employers must be pro-active in enabling staff to take holiday, ECJ rules
- Addison Lee drivers were workers, not self-employed
- Morrisons loses appeal in personal data breach case
- Individual employees liable for whistleblowing dismissal
- Protection against victimisation not lost where employee had ulterior motive for alleging discrimination
- Contractual change not void under TUPE
- When is a resignation letter not a resignation?
- Disability discrimination: Failure to consider part-time working meant dismissal not justified
- Successful appeal meant no dismissal
- Lower termination payments for fixed-term employees not unlawful
- How do Permanent Health Insurance pay outs affect discrimination compensation?
- Written warning for sickness absence was disability discrimination
- National Minimum Wage not payable for sleep-in shifts
- No right of appeal made dismissal unfair
- Part-time workers: zero-hours lecturer could compare himself to full-time permanent lecturer
- Summary dismissal fair where no single act of gross misconduct
- Whistleblowing disclosures: wrong to distinguish between information and allegations
- Payment to settle part-time working claim taxable as earnings
- Harassment: context is key
- Supreme Court rules Pimlico plumber was a worker, not self-employed
- Employer unaware of link between misconduct and disability still liable for discrimination
- Tribunal wrong to decide that enhancing maternity pay but not shared parental pay was not indirect sex discrimination
- Constructive dismissal: affirmation does not affect employee’s right to rely on employer’s previous conduct
- When are dismissal notices effective?
- Enhancing maternity pay but not shared parental pay is not direct sex discrimination
- No obligation to revisit dismissal decision on learning of employee’s pregnancy
- Collective redundancies: no priority treatment for pregnant workers
- Employee with “pre-cancerous lesion” deemed disabled
- Whistleblowing detriment claims: whose motive counts?
- Post-termination losses recoverable in pre-dismissal detriment claim
- Employer not fixed with knowledge of employee’s disability
- Availability of injury to feelings compensation in detrimental treatment claims
- Police force discriminated on grounds of perceived disability
- No whistleblowing protection for employee concerned only for personal liability
- No obligation to provide weekly rest break after six consecutive working days
- Deliveroo riders are not workers, CAC rules
- Uber drivers are workers, Employment Appeal Tribunal confirms
- Failing to conduct appropriate risk assessment for breastfeeding mothers is sex discrimination
- No whistleblowing dismissal if decision-maker unaware of protected disclosures
- Dismissal not unfair because investigation too thorough
- Pregnant Workers may be Protected Before Informing Employer of Pregnancy
- Monitoring personal communications on work systems
- Compensatory awards to increase as employer pension contributions count towards the calculation of a week’s pay
- Former employee committed to prison for contempt after breaching injunction
- Employer entitled to calculate ill-health pension by reference to part time salary
- Change to burden of proof in discrimination claims
- Court of Appeal Guidance on Discrimination Awards Where Psychiatric Injury Caused by Multiple Factors
- When is a Whistleblowing Disclosure in the Public Interest?
- Paid Holiday: Unlimited Carry Over Until Worker Has Opportunity to Take it
- Failure to enhance pay for man seeking shared parental leave was direct sex discrimination
- The importance of adapting contracts for overseas employees
- Employer’s Belief that Whistleblowing Disclosure Not Protected is Irrelevant
- No Disability Discrimination where Employee made Redundant after Absence for Cancer Treatment
- Requirement to sit multiple choice test was disability discrimination
- Supreme Court finds that teachers on strike were deducted too much pay