How many times has [2008] EWCA Civ 380 been cited?

[2008] EWCA Civ 380 is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2008] EWCA Civ 380

· cited by 2 · influence score 13/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

[2008] EWCA Civ 380

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Cited · 2

Cited — Tiplady v City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council 2019-12-11
“…judgment in Timis v Osipov [2018] EWCA Civ 2321, [2019] ICR 655 (p. 666 A-B), which quotes para. 48 of the judgment of Mummery LJ in Kuzel v Roche Products Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 380, [2008] ICR 799 (p. 809 D-E). She is right to say that the phrase “any detriment” in section 47B (1) is subject to no express limitation in the sub-section its…”
Cited — Timis & Anor v Osipov & Anor 2018-10-19
“…nterpret identical language (where it occurs) in the same way, it is not safe always to read across from one scheme to the other. In Kuzel v Roche Products Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 380, [2008] ICR 799, which involved a claim of whistleblower dismissal, Mummery LJ said, at para. 48 (p. 809 D-E):…”