EAT The employee carried out tasks for her employer and for the employer’s principal shareholder. She was dismissed for misconduct, much of which she believed arose out of tasks which were not part of her contract of employment. The Employment Appeal Tribunal found that she genuinely so believed but that her employer genuinely believed that those tasks were contractual and reasonably so believed. They made no finding as to whether they were contractual or not. They found that conduct was the reason for dismissal and that dismissal for that reason was fair.
Held: The Employment Appeal Tribunal were, so far as unfair dismissal was concerned, not obliged to make such a finding; their approach was correct. But they were bound to make such a finding before deciding that summary dismissal was not a breach of contract; and the employee was therefore not entitled to damages for breach of contract for a two-week notice period.
Citations:
[2008] UKEAT 0077 – 08 – 2406
Links:
Employment
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.272545