Nottingham University v Fishel

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date2000
Date2000
Year2000
CourtQueen's Bench Division

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
110 cases
  • Halcyon House Ltd v Caroline Baines and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • 11 Julio 2014
    ... ... The position was explained by Elias J in University of Nottingham v. Fishel [2000] ICR 1462 at pages 1490 – 1493:- " It is ... ...
  • Crowson Fabrics Ltd v Rider and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 20 Diciembre 2007
    ...to that of Mr Worrall and Mr Rider but I accept his observation that he had been successful in his negotiations. 85 Applying the Nottingham University case above I do not see that Mr Stimson is a fiduciary. In my view he was a senior and experienced salesman but his duties were no more than......
  • Generics [UK] Ltd t/a Mylan v Yeda Research and Development Company Ltd and Another
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 29 Julio 2013
    ...the employee must act solely or exclusively in the interest of the employer. He took the test from the decision of Elias J in University of Nottingham v Fishel [2000] EWHC 2221 (QB), [2000] ICR 1462. He quoted the following statement of Elias J: "…in determining whether a fiduciary relatio......
  • Dare International Ltd Claimant v (1) Stephen Soliman
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division
    • 5 Febrero 2025
    ... ... Reliance was placed on the dictum of Elias J in Nottingham University v Fishel [2000] ICR 1462 at 1493E-F: “… in determining whether a ... ...
  • Get Started for Free
3 firm's commentaries
  • Employee Competition: Recent Cases
    • United Kingdom
    • Mondaq United Kingdom
    • 7 Julio 2010
    ...is entitled to the single-minded loyalty of his fiduciary" (para 26). He reviewed Elias J's decision in Nottingham University v Fishel [2000] IRLR 471, which identified the circumstances in which an employee can owe fiduciary, in addition to contractual, duties (para 29). Jack J drew partic......
  • Beyond the Four Walls of the Employment Contract - Good Faith, Fidelity and Fiduciary Duties
    • Singapore
    • Mondaq Singapore
    • 31 Marzo 2012
    ...3 SLR(R) 429 at [30]. 2 Laughton & Hawley v BAPP Industrial Supplies Ltd [1986] ICR 634 at 638, University of Nottingham v Fishel [2000] ICR 1462 at [58] 3 Shepherds Investment Ltd v Walters [2006] EWHC 836 (Ch) 5 at [108] 4 British Midland Tool Ltd v Midland International Tooling Ltd [......
  • Implied duties of good faith, fidelity and fiduciary duties in employment contracts
    • Singapore
    • Mondaq Singapore
    • 19 Septiembre 2012
    ...that there is an employment relationship. The Court of Appeal cited the English High Court decision of Nottingham University v Fishel [2000] IRLR 471 ("Fishel") and clarified that fiduciary duties "result from the fact that within a particular contractual relationship there are specific con......
4 books & journal articles
  • FATE OF TRUST AND CONFIDENCE IN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2015, December 2015
    • 1 Diciembre 2015
    ...v Hertfordshire County Council[2000] IRLR 703. 67 See also para 43 below in relation to the approach of the courts in New Zealand. 68[2000] IRLR 471 at 483. See also Bhasin v Hrynew2014 SCC 71 at [65]. 69Cheah Peng Hock v Luzhou Bio-Chem Technology Ltd[2013] 2 SLR 577 at [46] and [49]. 70[1......
  • The Employment Relationship and Fiduciary Obligations
    • United Kingdom
    • Edinburgh University Press Edinburgh Law Review No. , May 2012
    • 1 Mayo 2012
    ...view is that entry into an employment contract, of itself, does not give rise to such a relationship,22University of Nottingham v Fishel [2000] IRLR 471. a position recently confirmed so far as Scotland is concerned by Lord Glennie in Samsung Semiconductor Europe v Docherty.33[2011] CSOH 32......
  • Forewarned Is Forearmed: Some Thoughts on the Inappropriate Use of Computers in the Workplace
    • South Africa
    • Juta South Africa Mercantile Law Journal No. , August 2019
    • 16 Agosto 2019
    ...Professor in Labour Law in the Department of Mercantile Law, University of South Africa, Pretoria.1 University of Nottingham v Fishel [2000] IRLR 471 para 96 (emphasis added).2 The advantages of having e-mail and Internet access at work include (a) it is a cost-effective way of communicatin......
  • The Employee Shareholder
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law No. 22-1, February 2015
    • 1 Febrero 2015
    ...British dicta, Sinclair v. Neighb our [1967] 2 QB 279.36 At judicial level, the paradigm of this is Nottingham University v. Fishel [2000] IRLR 471. Doctrinally, see S. Deak in and G.S. Morris , Labour Law, p.372.37 Alth ough t here is a la ck of l itera ture on th is poi nt, it may be a ......