In 2002, the Court of Appeal ruled in Hatton v Sutherland that:'An employer who offers a confidential advice service, with referral to appropriate counselling or treatment services, is unlikely to be found in breach of duty.' The guidelines, drawn up by Justice Hale (now Baroness Hale), were later approved in the House of Lords. The Court of Appeal has decided, however, that employee assistance programmes (EAPs) are not a 'panacea' and that while the Hatton guidelines still hold, courts should look at the circumstances of each case in deciding their particular relevance. The decision, in Intel Incorporation (UK) Limited v Daw, has other important implications, notably that employers need to be proactive in managing stress - bringing their common law duties more into line with their general duties under health and safety legislation.
展开▼
