Click the case name for better results:

Angard Staffing Solutions Ltd and Another v Kocur and Another (Agency Workers and Contract of Employment): EAT 11 Dec 2020

This appeal is primarily concerned with the scope of the rights conferred on agency workers by and the Agency Workers’ Regulations 2010 (‘the AWR’), which implements the Agency Workers Directive (‘the Directive’) into domestic law. The EAT found that: (1) The right conferred by regulation 13(1) of the AWR (derived from Article 6.1 of the … Continue reading Angard Staffing Solutions Ltd and Another v Kocur and Another (Agency Workers and Contract of Employment): EAT 11 Dec 2020

Mansfield Vtaran Microsystems Ltd (Contract of Employment – Damages for Breach of Contract : Unfair Dismissal): EAT 14 Sep 2018

CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Damages for breach of contract UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Compensation UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Contributory fault UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Polkey deduction The Appellant contended that the Employment Judge made a perverse finding regarding the Appellant’s conduct prior to dismissal (but which the Respondent only discovered after dismissal). The … Continue reading Mansfield Vtaran Microsystems Ltd (Contract of Employment – Damages for Breach of Contract : Unfair Dismissal): EAT 14 Sep 2018

Steer v Stormsure Ltd (Sex Discrimination, Human Rights): EAT 21 Dec 2020

The Appellant has presented a claim in the Employment Tribunal in which she alleges that she was dismissed by the Respondent and that the dismissal amounted to sex discrimination and/or victimisation on the ground that she had done a protected act, contrary to the Equality Act 2010. She appeals against the Employment Tribunal’s refusal to … Continue reading Steer v Stormsure Ltd (Sex Discrimination, Human Rights): EAT 21 Dec 2020

McBride v Employment Appeal Tribunal: SCS 25 Jan 2013

The appellant had been employed by the Police as a fingerprint officer. She was unfairly dismissed after a wrongful accusation. The tribunal ordered that she be reinstated, but on terms which would not result in her attending court as an expert witness. The EAT had concluded that the Tribunal’s decision to order reinstatement was perverse, … Continue reading McBride v Employment Appeal Tribunal: SCS 25 Jan 2013

Guildprime Specialists Contractors Ltd v Knight: EAT 24 Sep 2012

EAT UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGES At the hearing of the Claimant’s claim of unauthorised deductions, taken from his payments when he was made redundant in order to repay his car loan, the Employment Tribunal raised with the employer’s counsel the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. It then ruled upon it without giving counsel … Continue reading Guildprime Specialists Contractors Ltd v Knight: EAT 24 Sep 2012

National Union of Teachers and others v Governing Body of St Mary’s Church of England (Aided) Junior School and others: CA 12 Dec 1996

The acquired rights directive applies to a board of governors of a school since it is an ’emanation of state’. LMA This was a claim by teachers who had lost their jobs. They claimed the protection of te hDirective. Held: The governing body of the voluntary aided school was an emanation of the State. The … Continue reading National Union of Teachers and others v Governing Body of St Mary’s Church of England (Aided) Junior School and others: CA 12 Dec 1996

Biggs v Somerset County Council: CA 29 Jan 1996

The employee at the time of her dismissal was expressly debarred by statute from bringing her complaint of unfair dismissal because she was a part-time employee. It was only many years later the statute was held to impugn EU law and had done so retrospectively. Held: Despite the fact that the Claimant could not have … Continue reading Biggs v Somerset County Council: CA 29 Jan 1996

Small v The Shrewsbury and Telford Hospitals NHS Trust (Victimisation Discrimination – Protected Disclosure – Practice and Procedure): EAT 19 Aug 2019

VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosure PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disposal of appeal including remission The Court of Appeal had remitted back to the Tribunal the issue of a Chagger claim for damages for stigma loss, following the termination of the Appellant’s contract as a worker after raising asbestos issues which had constituted a detriment under … Continue reading Small v The Shrewsbury and Telford Hospitals NHS Trust (Victimisation Discrimination – Protected Disclosure – Practice and Procedure): EAT 19 Aug 2019

Arthur v Hertfordshire Partnership University NS Foundation Trust (Practice and Procedure Striking-Out : Dismissal): EAT 13 Aug 2019

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Striking-out / dismissal PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Imposition of deposit Rules 37(1) and 39(1) Schedule 1 Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 The Employment Tribunal (‘ET’) had struck out the Claimant’s claim of protected disclosure detriments and dismissal as having no reasonable prospect of success. In the alternative, the ET … Continue reading Arthur v Hertfordshire Partnership University NS Foundation Trust (Practice and Procedure Striking-Out : Dismissal): EAT 13 Aug 2019

Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd: SCS 22 Jun 2010

The pursuer, living in England was dismissed from a post by the defenders whilst he was working for them in Libya. He claimed unfair dismissal. They said that his employment was not subject to British Law. Held: The employment was governed by UK law. Judges: Lord Osborne, Lord Carloway, Lord Brodie Citations: [2010] ScotCS CSIH … Continue reading Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd: SCS 22 Jun 2010

Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Unison: 1996

The 1978 Directive required consultation in the case of collective redundancies. Acts had incorrectly incorporated this requirement into English law. The error was corrected in the 1995 Regulations. Held: Anything is ‘related to’ a Community obligation so long as it is not distinct, separate or divorced from it. The 1995 Regulations were valid.Otton LJ said: … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Unison: 1996

D Bamsey and others v Albon Engineering and Manufacturing Plc: CA 25 Mar 2004

The applicants worked under an arrangement where they received considerable payments additional to their basic pay for compulsory overtime, but the holiday pay was calculated by the employer on the basic pay. Held: The 1998 Regulations were intended to protect workers, but the directive did not require any payment over and above the contractual entitlement. … Continue reading D Bamsey and others v Albon Engineering and Manufacturing Plc: CA 25 Mar 2004

Carmichael and Another v National Power Plc: EAT 25 Apr 1996

Citations: [1996] UKEAT 1160 – 95 – 2504 Links: Bailii Cited by: Appeal from – Carmichael and Lesse v National Power Plc CA 29-Jan-1997 Casual workers employed under ‘nil hours’ relationship still had a contract of employment and the appropriate and associated rights. A court was fully able to determine the terms of the contract. … Continue reading Carmichael and Another v National Power Plc: EAT 25 Apr 1996

Ocular Sciences Ltd v Aspect Vision Care Ltd: ChD 11 Nov 1996

The freedom for a claimant in registered design right to frame his claim, as to whether he asserts an infringement of the entire design, or limits it to the section infringed, is important. Laddie J said: ‘This means that the proprietor can trim his design right claim to most closely match what he believes the … Continue reading Ocular Sciences Ltd v Aspect Vision Care Ltd: ChD 11 Nov 1996

Hinkley v Ashtons Manufacturing Ltd, Thomas A Ashton Ltd P Crook: EAT 18 Mar 2002

EAT Contract of Employment – Breach of ContractThe appellant had owned a company. She sold the shares to the second respondent in return for a position as a director. After dismissal she appealed several findings. Held: The tribunal deciding an issue as to jurisdiction had pre-empted the job of the tribunal of making findings as … Continue reading Hinkley v Ashtons Manufacturing Ltd, Thomas A Ashton Ltd P Crook: EAT 18 Mar 2002

Johansen v Norway: ECHR 7 Aug 1996

The court had to consider a permanent placement of a child with a view to adoption in oposition to the natural parents’ wishes. Held: Particular weight should be attached to the best interests of the child, which may override those of the parent: ‘These measures were particularly far-reaching in that they totally deprived the applicant … Continue reading Johansen v Norway: ECHR 7 Aug 1996

P v S and Cornwall County Council: ECJ 30 Apr 1996

An employee at an educational establishment told management that he intended to undergo gender reassignment. He was given notice of dismissal. Held: The scope of the Directive was not confined to discrimination based on the fact that a person was of one or other sex but also extended to discrimination arising from the gender reassignment … Continue reading P v S and Cornwall County Council: ECJ 30 Apr 1996

Mothew (T/a Stapley and Co) v Bristol and West Building Society: CA 24 Jul 1996

The solicitor, acting in a land purchase transaction for his lay client and the plaintiff, had unwittingly misled the claimant by telling the claimant that the purchasers were providing the balance of the purchase price themselves without recourse to further borrowing when he knew that they were using an overdraft to obtain further funding. The … Continue reading Mothew (T/a Stapley and Co) v Bristol and West Building Society: CA 24 Jul 1996

Regina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB: Admn 17 Oct 1996

Sperm which had been taken from a dying and unconscious man may not be used for the later insemination of his surviving wife. The Act required his written consent. Held: Community Law does not assist the Applicant. The question had been considered in Parliament, and allowing for the limitations on the powers of courts exercising … Continue reading Regina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB: Admn 17 Oct 1996

Fletcher and others and Preston and others v Midland Bank Plc and Wolverhampton Healthcare NHS Trust Secretary of State for Health and others: EAT 24 Jun 1996

EAT Equal Pay Act – Addendum to principal judgment. Part timers’ claims for membership of pension schemes only made out of time. EAT Equal Pay Act – (no sub-topic). Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Mummery Citations: Times 02-Jul-1996, EAT/6/96, EAT/5/96, [1996] UKEAT 5 – 96 – 2406 Links: EAT, Bailii Statutes: Equal Pay Act 1970 … Continue reading Fletcher and others and Preston and others v Midland Bank Plc and Wolverhampton Healthcare NHS Trust Secretary of State for Health and others: EAT 24 Jun 1996

Rotsart de Hertaing v Benoidt and IGC Housing Service (In Liquidation) and Another: ECJ 14 Nov 1996

ECJ Safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses – Transfer to the transferee of the rights and obligations arising from a contract of employment – Date of transfer. Citations: Times 25-Nov-1996, [1997] IRLR 127, C-305/94, [1996] EUECJ C-305/94 Links: Bailii Statutes: EC Directive 77/187/EEC Cited by: … Continue reading Rotsart de Hertaing v Benoidt and IGC Housing Service (In Liquidation) and Another: ECJ 14 Nov 1996

Diocese of Southwark and Others v Coker: EAT 4 Apr 1996

A curate is not an employee of the Church and cannot claim unfair dismissal. Judges: Hull QC Citations: [1995] UKEAT 374 – 95 – 0811 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 Citing: Appeal from – Coker v Diocese of Southwark ET 16-Mar-1995 An Anglican clergyman is an employee of the church, and so … Continue reading Diocese of Southwark and Others v Coker: EAT 4 Apr 1996

D v M: QBD 18 Mar 1996

A post employment restrictive covenant was unreasonable where an employee was restricted even after the wrongful termination of his employment by the company. Laws J set out the appropriate principle: ‘A restrictive covenant, having effect after the termination of a contract of service or for services, which on its face applies to the employer’s benefit … Continue reading D v M: QBD 18 Mar 1996

Barnett v Brabyn (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 5 Jul 1996

Re-statement of character of contracts of employment and services and difference. The form of contract is important but not conclusive. It is necessary to look at the terms of the contract as a whole concentrating on the substantive rights and obligations of the parties and decide whether they are more or less strongly indicative of … Continue reading Barnett v Brabyn (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 5 Jul 1996

Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie: CA 20 Aug 1999

A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the costs of a child’s education. Any consequences of a failure to keep a promise … Continue reading Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie: CA 20 Aug 1999

Clarke v The Restaurant Group (UK) Ltd (Practice and Procedure): EAT 20 Jul 2021

The claimant in the employment tribunal was a litigant in person. Upon consideration of her claim form under rule 12 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, a judge determined that there were two complaints, being of (a) ordinary unfair dismissal, in respect of which the claimant lacked qualifying service, and which was dismissed; and (b) … Continue reading Clarke v The Restaurant Group (UK) Ltd (Practice and Procedure): EAT 20 Jul 2021

Gaygusuz v Austria: ECHR 16 Sep 1996

The applicant was a Turkish national resident in Austria. While working there he had paid unemployment insurance contributions. At a stage when he was unemployed he applied for an advance on his pension in the form of emergency assistance. That was available under the material Austrian legislation, but one of the conditions was that the … Continue reading Gaygusuz v Austria: ECHR 16 Sep 1996

Regina v Bedwellty Justices Ex Parte Williams: HL 18 Sep 1996

A decision at committal to return an accused for trial is susceptible to judicial review where committal was based solely on inadmissible evidence or was based on evidence not reasonably capable of supporting it. The committal was quashed.The ‘Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court has normally in judicial review proceedings jurisdiction to quash a … Continue reading Regina v Bedwellty Justices Ex Parte Williams: HL 18 Sep 1996

Norman and Another v National Audit Office (Contract of Employment : Implied Term/Variation/Construction of Term): EAT 15 Dec 2014

EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Implied term/variation/construction of term The Employment Tribunal had erred in concluding that a term in the letters of appointment of the Claimants enabled the employer to vary the contract unilaterally; the term was unclear and probably ambiguous – Wandsworth London Borough Council v D’Silva [1998] IRLR 193 and Security and … Continue reading Norman and Another v National Audit Office (Contract of Employment : Implied Term/Variation/Construction of Term): EAT 15 Dec 2014

Schaathun v Executive and Business Aviation Support Ltd (Practice and Procedure: Costs): EAT 13 Jul 2015

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs The Employment Judge came to an impermissible conclusion on the facts in finding that the Claimant had asked the Tribunal to make a Norwegian interpreter available at the Full Hearing. Her email was plainly an enquiry if it would be possible for an interpreter to be present. Further, she was … Continue reading Schaathun v Executive and Business Aviation Support Ltd (Practice and Procedure: Costs): EAT 13 Jul 2015

EF v AB and Others (Practice and Procedure : Restricted Reporting Order): EAT 25 Mar 2015

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Restricted order reporting Disposal of appeal including remission The Employment Tribunal erred in refusing to extend Restricted Reporting Orders in respect of a Respondent to Employment Tribunal proceedings and a non-party. They failed to carry out the assessment of comparative importance of the Article 8 and Article 10 rights engaged in … Continue reading EF v AB and Others (Practice and Procedure : Restricted Reporting Order): EAT 25 Mar 2015

Burdett v Aviva Employment Services Ltd: EAT 14 Nov 2014

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Conduct – Section 98(2)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996 In a case where the Claimant had committed (admitted) assaults in the workplace because of his disability (he suffers from a paranoid schizophrenic illness), the ET found that the Respondent had dismissed him because of his having committed acts of gross misconduct and … Continue reading Burdett v Aviva Employment Services Ltd: EAT 14 Nov 2014

O’Sullivan v DSM Demolition Ltd (Jurisdictional Points – Continuity of Employment): EAT 15 May 2020

The Employment Tribunal dismissed the Claimant’s claim of unfair dismissal on the basis that he did not have two years’ continuous employment. The dispute turned on the start date. Section 211(1)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996 provides that, for these purposes, a period of continuous employment begins ‘with the day on which the employee starts work’. … Continue reading O’Sullivan v DSM Demolition Ltd (Jurisdictional Points – Continuity of Employment): EAT 15 May 2020

Regina (Williamson and Others) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment: Admn 15 Nov 2001

A genuine religious belief which supported the use of corporal punishment in schools was not itself either a manifestation of religious belief which required protection under the convention, or a religious and philosophical conviction for the purposes of the right to education provisions of article 2. A religiously founded belief that corporal punishment should be … Continue reading Regina (Williamson and Others) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment: Admn 15 Nov 2001

Taylor and Others (T/A Partners In The Cornerstone Practice) v Crockford: EAT 28 Feb 2014

EAT Unfair Dismissal : Reason for Dismissal Including Substantial Other Reason – Reasonableness of dismissal The Employment Judge did not err in holding that the dismissal of the Claimant for refusing to agree to a rescheduling of her working hours was a dismissal for some other substantial reason within the meaning of section 98(1)(b) of … Continue reading Taylor and Others (T/A Partners In The Cornerstone Practice) v Crockford: EAT 28 Feb 2014

Rogers v Craigclowan School (Contract of Employment): EAT 19 Jul 2013

EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT The Claimant sought a declaration that he was an employee of the Respondent, and sought a declaration of his terms and conditions of employment. He also claimed there had been an unlawful deduction from wages under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and in respect of holiday pay. The … Continue reading Rogers v Craigclowan School (Contract of Employment): EAT 19 Jul 2013

Stefanko and Others v Maritime Hotel Ltd and Another (Contract of Employment : Race Discrimination): EAT 25 Sep 2018

CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Written particulars RACE DISCRIMINATION – Direct RACE DISCRIMINATION – Comparison The Employment Tribunal erred in concluding that an employee who has more than one but less than two months’ service is not entitled to a section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996 statement of terms and conditions of employment. It does not … Continue reading Stefanko and Others v Maritime Hotel Ltd and Another (Contract of Employment : Race Discrimination): EAT 25 Sep 2018

Stott v Leadec Ltd (Human Rights : Litigation Capacity): EAT 20 Feb 2020

At the outset of a Preliminary Hearing, the ELAAS representative raised concerns as to the Appellant’s litigation capacity. Adjourning the hearing on terms enabling the investigation of that issue, the EAT held that section 30(3) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (‘the ETA’) provides the EAT with the power to regulate its own procedure, subject … Continue reading Stott v Leadec Ltd (Human Rights : Litigation Capacity): EAT 20 Feb 2020

SD (Aberdeen) Ltd v Wright and Others (Jurisdictional Points – Continuity of Employment): EAT 14 Sep 2018

The Employment Tribunal had been faced with a dispute about whether the claimant was employed by one or more of a network of companies/business entities or was a self-employed contractor. The evidence illustrated that he had worked for more than one entity. Having decided that he had been an employee throughout the material period, the … Continue reading SD (Aberdeen) Ltd v Wright and Others (Jurisdictional Points – Continuity of Employment): EAT 14 Sep 2018

Regina (Williamson and Others) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment: CA 12 Dec 2002

The claimants sought a declaration that the restriction on the infliction of corporal punishment in schools infringed their human right of freedom of religion. The schools concerned were Christian schools who believed that moderate corporal discipline was required in order to give expression to their religious beliefs. The respondent argued that the beliefs asserted, whilst … Continue reading Regina (Williamson and Others) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment: CA 12 Dec 2002

Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions: HL 19 Jun 2003

The court considered whether discriminatory acts after the termination of employment were caught by the respective anti-discrimination Acts. The acts included a failure to give proper references. They pursued claims on the basis of victimisation after their primary discrimination claims. Held: The 1975 and 1976 Acts were similarly phrased and the wording in the 1995 … Continue reading Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions: HL 19 Jun 2003

Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005

The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. Held: The appeal was dismissed. For Article 9 to be engaged (aside from certain other threshold conditions) the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005

The Child Poverty Action Group v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 8 Dec 2010

The Action Group had obtained a declaration that, where an overpayment of benefits had arisen due to a miscalculation by the officers of the Department, any process of recovering the overpayment must be by the Act, and that the Department could not use the law of unjust enrichment. The Department Appealed. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading The Child Poverty Action Group v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 8 Dec 2010

Chahal v The United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Nov 1996

Proper Reply Opportunity Required on Deportation (Grand Chamber) The claimant was an Indian citizen who had been granted indefinite leave to remain in this country but whose activities as a Sikh separatist brought him to the notice of the authorities both in India and here. The Home Secretary of the day decided that he should … Continue reading Chahal v The United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Nov 1996

X v Y (Employment: Sex Offender): CA 28 May 2004

The claimant had been dismissed after it was discovered he had been cautioned for a public homosexual act. He appealed dismissal of his claim saying that the standard of fairness applied was inappropriate with regard to the Human Rights Act, and that the state had a duty to protect him from private acts which breached … Continue reading X v Y (Employment: Sex Offender): CA 28 May 2004

Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd v Ravat: EAT 22 Oct 2008

EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS: Working outside the jurisdiction Jurisdiction in unfair dismissal. The Claimant was employed by the respondents, a UK company in the business of providing tools, services and personnel to the oil industry. He worked in Libya, on operations which were part of the business of an associated German company. He was dismissed and … Continue reading Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd v Ravat: EAT 22 Oct 2008

Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd: SC 8 Feb 2012

The respondent was employed by the appellant. He was resident in GB, and was based here, but much work was overseas. At the time of his dismissal he was working in Libya. The company denied that UK law applied. He alleged unfair dismissal. Held: The company’s appeal failed. The details that he was dismissed by … Continue reading Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd: SC 8 Feb 2012

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Avuru v Favernmead Ltd and Another (Redundancy and Jurisdictional : Time Points): EAT 29 May 2020

Redundancy and Jurisdictional/Time Points In this appeal the EAT considered that where the EJ had made findings that indicated that the Claimant’s effective date of termination (Employment Rights Act 1996 section 97(1)(b) and 145(2)) could be established by reference to objective factors and that the EJ had held that by that date the Claimant ought … Continue reading Avuru v Favernmead Ltd and Another (Redundancy and Jurisdictional : Time Points): EAT 29 May 2020

Strand Transport Services Ltd v Whitworth: CA 6 Aug 2009

The process of the company making the claimant redundant had been declared a sham. The company appealed against a decision that even had the correct procedures been followed, the decision would have been the same. The tribunal said that insufficient evidence had been brought to support such an assertion. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The … Continue reading Strand Transport Services Ltd v Whitworth: CA 6 Aug 2009

The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Walden, Kealfreight Ltd: EAT 22 Jul 1999

Employee to show company insolvent to claim EAT Insolvent Employer – The onus is on the applicant seeking payment for lost wages from the Secretary of state to establish that the employer company is insolvent. There must be proof of the occurring of an event falling within section 183(3) EAT Insolvency – (no sub-topic) Judges: … Continue reading The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Walden, Kealfreight Ltd: EAT 22 Jul 1999

Northbay Pelagic Ltd v Anderson (Unfair Dismissal): EAT 28 Jan 2021

Unfair Dismissal The Respondent appealed the Tribunal’s decision that the Claimant had been unfairly dismissed. The Tribunal had concluded that having regard to s. 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 the Respondents decision to dismiss fell outside the band of reasonable responses. On Appeal the Respondent argued that the Tribunal had fallen into a … Continue reading Northbay Pelagic Ltd v Anderson (Unfair Dismissal): EAT 28 Jan 2021

Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Bottrill: CA 12 Feb 1999

There is no rule of law, to suggest that a sole director and owner of majority of shareholding, could not be an employee of that company, and be entitled to a redundancy payment on the liquidation of the company. ‘If the tribunal considers that the contract is not a sham, it is likely to wish … Continue reading Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Bottrill: CA 12 Feb 1999

Chatterjee v Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust (Victimisation Discrimination – Protected Disclosure): EAT 23 Sep 2019

The Employment Tribunal found that the Claimant made protected disclosures in respect of the introduction of a new rota system, which he reasonably believed posed a danger to the health and safety of patients, and to be made in the public interest. Subsequent to this, concerns raised by colleagues about his alleged conduct were referred … Continue reading Chatterjee v Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust (Victimisation Discrimination – Protected Disclosure): EAT 23 Sep 2019

Castano v London General Transport Services Ltd (Victimisation Detriment Health and Safety): EAT 29 Oct 2019

Unfair dismissal – automatically unfair dismissal – section 100 Employment Rights Act 1996 The Claimant was a bus operator, operating out of the Putney bus garage, who claimed he had suffered detriment and automatic unfair dismissal on health and safety grounds under Sections 44 and 100 Employment Rights Act 1996 (‘the ERA’). These claims were … Continue reading Castano v London General Transport Services Ltd (Victimisation Detriment Health and Safety): EAT 29 Oct 2019

Software 2000 Ltd v Andrews etc: EAT 17 Jan 2007

EAT Four employees successfully established before the Employment Tribunal that they had been unfairly dismissed for redundancy. The Tribunal found that there had been procedural defects. In particular the assessments in the redundancy exercise had been inadequate and subjective. The Tribunal considered whether the dismissals were fair under section 98A(2) of the Employment Rights Act … Continue reading Software 2000 Ltd v Andrews etc: EAT 17 Jan 2007

Alemi v Mitchell and Another (Sex Discrimination): EAT 8 Jan 2021

Sex Discrimination The Employment Judge erred in law in holding that all that is necessary for a person to be an employee in the extended sense for the purposes of section 83(2) Equality Act 2010 is that the person should have entered into a contract under which she or he agrees to do work personally. … Continue reading Alemi v Mitchell and Another (Sex Discrimination): EAT 8 Jan 2021

Fisher v California Cake and Cookie Co: 1997

Lord Johnston considered the approach to be taken under section 98A: ‘In seeking to resolve this matter, it is necessary to make two observations of a general nature. In the first place, when an industrial tribunal is addressing the question in the context of remedy, against a background of procedural unfairness, whether a fair procedure … Continue reading Fisher v California Cake and Cookie Co: 1997

Clark Tokeley Ltd (T/a Spell Brook Ltd) v Oakes and others: CA 27 Jul 1998

The transfer of an undertaking involved a series of acts which need not occur at the same time and the time of such transfer must be construed flexibly to reflect the period of time over which the transfer actually occurs. Citations: Times 10-Sep-1998, Gazette 30-Sep-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1294, [1998] IRLR 577, [1998] 4 All … Continue reading Clark Tokeley Ltd (T/a Spell Brook Ltd) v Oakes and others: CA 27 Jul 1998

University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust v Reuser (Unfair Dismissal – Whistleblowing, Protected Disclosures): EAT 1 May 2020

UNFAIR DISMISSAL WHISTLEBLOWING, PROTECTED DISCLOSURES CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT The employment tribunal found that the Claimant had been unfairly dismissed, contrary to section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (‘the ERA’), and wrongfully dismissed, but had not been automatically unfairly dismissed, contrary to section 103A of the ERA. On the Respondent employer’s appeal from the … Continue reading University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust v Reuser (Unfair Dismissal – Whistleblowing, Protected Disclosures): EAT 1 May 2020

GAB Robins (UK) Ltd v Triggs: CA 30 Jan 2008

The claimant had been awarded damages for unfair constructive dismissal. The employer appealed an award of damages for the period prior to the acceptance by the employee of the repudiatory breach. Held: Where a claimant’s losses arose before the dismissal actually occurred, she might have a separate claim for damages, but that claim was only … Continue reading GAB Robins (UK) Ltd v Triggs: CA 30 Jan 2008

Airbus UK Ltd v MG Webb: CA 7 Feb 2008

The court considered the dismissal by an employer of an employee for a disciplinary offence when he would not have been dismissed but for an earlier warning which had expired. Held: The company’s appeal succeded. The court summarised the balance as follows: ‘On the one hand, if the employer has chosen to impose a time-limited … Continue reading Airbus UK Ltd v MG Webb: CA 7 Feb 2008

Home Office v Evans and Laidlaw: CA 2 Nov 2007

The employer appealed findings of constructive dismissal after two of its immigration officers had refused to be moved under mobility clauses in their contracts, rather than be made redundant. Held: The appeal succeeded. The question was not the Home Office’s motive for its change of mind, but whether it was legally entitled to invoke the … Continue reading Home Office v Evans and Laidlaw: CA 2 Nov 2007

Eastwood v Magnox Electric plc: CA 2002

There was a claim for damages in respect of psychiatric injury said to result from a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, which was asserted to be recoverable notwithstanding Johnson, on the basis that the acts of the employer complained of could be severed from the employer’s conduct leading to the dismissal, … Continue reading Eastwood v Magnox Electric plc: CA 2002

Jones v Lingfield Leisure Plc: CA 18 Jun 1998

The claimant had been unfairly dismissed but in addition to this employment she had also lost her earnings from a private practice as an aerobics teacher at the same facility where she was employed. She had been awarded damages for the employment loss, but not the rest. Held: The court did not state as a … Continue reading Jones v Lingfield Leisure Plc: CA 18 Jun 1998

British Broadcasting Corporation v Kelly-Phillips: CA 24 Apr 1998

When a one year fixed term employment contract was extended by a period of less than a year, but then not again renewed, there was no unfair dismissal, since the exemption for the original term applied also to any extension. There had been conflicting interpretations of the statutory provisions. S197 could not be construed on … Continue reading British Broadcasting Corporation v Kelly-Phillips: CA 24 Apr 1998

Hay and Others v Gilgrove Ltd and Others: CA 26 Apr 2013

The employees, registered market porters, appealed against reversal of the Tribunal’s judgment that the employer had made unlawful deductions from their wages. The deductions purported to have been authorised under collective agreements from the 1970s. The employers dedcuted porterage charges from the stall holders, and distributed the charge among all the porters, saying that the … Continue reading Hay and Others v Gilgrove Ltd and Others: CA 26 Apr 2013

Dhunna v Creditsights Ltd: EAT 3 Apr 2013

EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Working outside the jurisdiction WORKING TIME REGULATIONS – Holiday pay The approach to determining whether an employee of British company who works and lives abroad falls within the territorial scope of the Employment Rights Act 1996 section 94(1) has been developed since Lawson v Serco Ltd [2006] ICR 250. The question … Continue reading Dhunna v Creditsights Ltd: EAT 3 Apr 2013

El-Kholy v Rentokil Initial Facilities Services (UK) Ltd: EAT 21 Mar 2013

EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Extension of time: reasonably practicableWhere a Claimant has retained a solicitor to act for him and failed to meet the deadline for presenting a complaint of unfair dismissal to an Employment Tribunal, the adviser’s fault will defeat any attempt to argue that it was not reasonably practicable to make a timely … Continue reading El-Kholy v Rentokil Initial Facilities Services (UK) Ltd: EAT 21 Mar 2013

Clarence High School and Another v Boardman: CA 15 Mar 2013

The claimant school teacher had been dismissed, after a finding that she had assaulted a pupil. She denied the assualt. Held: The School’s appeal against the decision of the EAT to re-instate the claim of unfair dismissal succeeded. The EAT had wrongly substituted its won veiw of the facts for that of the Tribunal. However … Continue reading Clarence High School and Another v Boardman: CA 15 Mar 2013

Norris and Others v London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority: EAT 8 Mar 2013

EAT UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGES – Industrial actionFirefighter objects to being asked to ‘act up’ as watch manager but continues to do so under protest – Eventually refuses to do so in the context of official industrial action being taken by colleagues, where refusal to act up forms part of the action called by the … Continue reading Norris and Others v London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority: EAT 8 Mar 2013

Onyango v Berkeley (T/A Berkeley Solicitors): EAT 25 Jan 2013

EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureWhether Claimant may rely on post-termination protected disclosure in ‘whistleblowing’ claim under s.47B Employment Rights Act 1996. He can. Appeal allowed against Employment Tribunal Judgment to the contrary. Judges: Peter Clark J Citations: [2013] UKEAT 0407 – 12 – 2501 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 47B Jurisdiction: England … Continue reading Onyango v Berkeley (T/A Berkeley Solicitors): EAT 25 Jan 2013

Kwik Save Stores Limited v Greaves; Crees v Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Limited: CA 20 Jan 1998

Women had taken extended maternity leave, but having followed the procedures, had been unable for illness to return to work on the day they had notified. The employer then asserted that the claimants had resigned. The EAT had confirm that they had not been unfairly dismissed. Held: The legislation provided ‘special protection for the security … Continue reading Kwik Save Stores Limited v Greaves; Crees v Royal London Mutual Insurance Society Limited: CA 20 Jan 1998

Barot v London Borough of Brent: EAT 17 Jan 2013

EAT REDUNDANCY PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity The Claimant worked as an Accountant in the Respondent’s Children and Families Directorate. The Employment Tribunal was correct to find that a redundancy situation was created when the Respondent reorganised the Directorate and introduced requirement for skills the Claimant was not considered to have. … Continue reading Barot v London Borough of Brent: EAT 17 Jan 2013

McAdie v Royal Bank of Scotland: CA 31 Jul 2007

The claimant succeeded in her claim for unfair dismissal, but now appealed against the reversal of the decision by the EAT. She had been dismissed for incapability to which she had contributed by her conduct. She had refused a move to another bank of the branch which would upset her child care arrangements. She was … Continue reading McAdie v Royal Bank of Scotland: CA 31 Jul 2007

Stubbs v Grafters Ltd: EAT 31 May 2022

Practice and Procedure The claim form which alleged unfair dismissal contained an indication of a claim of unfair dismissal pursuant to section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA). The strike out was made on the basis that the Appellant had insufficient continuity of employment to pursue an unfair dismissal claim. This was correct in respect … Continue reading Stubbs v Grafters Ltd: EAT 31 May 2022

Kingston Upon Hull City Council v Schofield and Others: EAT 6 Nov 2012

EAT UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGESThe Claimants claimed that the Respondent had wrongly evaluated their jobs under the applicable job evaluation scheme. They contended that properly evaluated they would have been awarded higher scores entitling them to a higher Grade, (Grade 7 or 8). They brought claims for deduction from wages under the Employment Rights Act … Continue reading Kingston Upon Hull City Council v Schofield and Others: EAT 6 Nov 2012

Luke v Stoke-On-Trent City Council: CA 24 Jul 2007

The employee appealed against a decision rejecting her claim that the employer had made an unlawful deduction from her salary. Judges: Browne-Wilkinson J Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 761, [2007] IRLR 777, [2007] ICR 167 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 13 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Jones v Associated Tunnelling Co Ltd … Continue reading Luke v Stoke-On-Trent City Council: CA 24 Jul 2007

Camden Primary Care Trust v Atchoe: CA 9 May 2007

Appeal against dismissal of claim of unauthorised deduction from wages. Judges: Sir Igor Judge P, Moore-Bick LJ, Sir Peter Gibson Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 714 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 13 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Camden Primary Care Trust v Atchoe EAT 22-Aug-2006 EAT Unlawful Deduction from Wages – … Continue reading Camden Primary Care Trust v Atchoe: CA 9 May 2007

Booley v British Army Mod: EAT 19 Jul 2012

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Time for appealingJURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Excluded employmentsThe Claimant, a former soldier, resigned and claimed constructive unfair dismissal and breach of contract in the Employment Tribunal. It declined jurisdiction: Employment Rights Act 1996 ss191-2 disapply the Act to the armed forces. The Claimant received clear legal advice to that effect but … Continue reading Booley v British Army Mod: EAT 19 Jul 2012

Easwaran v St George’s University of London: EAT 24 Jun 2010

EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureTribunal entitled to decide on the facts that the employee’s belief that his disclosure tended to show matters of the kind specified under section 43B (1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not reasonable. Judges: Underhill P J Citations: [2010] UKEAT 0167 – 10 – 2406 Links: Bailii Statutes: … Continue reading Easwaran v St George’s University of London: EAT 24 Jun 2010

Anderson and Others v London Fire Emergency Planning Authority: EAT 19 Jul 2012

EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENTWhether establishedImplied term/variation/construction of termThe Employment Tribunal erred in holding that the agreement reached between the Respondent and Trade Unions for the third year of a three year pay deal was not legally enforceable because it gave the employer two options for the pay increase to be awarded with no agreement as … Continue reading Anderson and Others v London Fire Emergency Planning Authority: EAT 19 Jul 2012

Riley v Belmont Green Finance Ltd (T/A Vida Homeloans) (Victimisation Discrimination- Whistleblowing- Perversity): EAT 13 Mar 2020

VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Whistleblowing PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Perversity The Claimant was a worker employed by the Respondent on a temporary assignment. On 14 March 2017, the Respondent terminated the assignment with immediate effect. There had been a meeting the previous day between the Claimant and one of the Respondent’s managers. The Claimant had made … Continue reading Riley v Belmont Green Finance Ltd (T/A Vida Homeloans) (Victimisation Discrimination- Whistleblowing- Perversity): EAT 13 Mar 2020

Cumbria Partnership NHS Foundation Trust v Steel: EAT 17 May 2012

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL Employment Rights Act 1996, section 98(4) Fairness of dismissal Before the Employment Tribunal it was agreed that the Claimant was dismissed for the potentially fair reason of redundancy. It was disputed that the test of fairness was satisfied. The Claimant alleged that he was the highest scoring applicant for a new post, … Continue reading Cumbria Partnership NHS Foundation Trust v Steel: EAT 17 May 2012

Kenneth Cobley v Forward Technology Industries Plc: CA 14 May 2003

The claimant had been chief executive and a director of the respondent for many years, but was dismissed upon it being taken over. His contract of employment as chief executive provided that it was to be coterminous with his appointment as director. Held: The tribunal were not wrong in law in identifying the reason and … Continue reading Kenneth Cobley v Forward Technology Industries Plc: CA 14 May 2003

Hawes and Curtis Ltd v Arfan and Another: EAT 1 Jun 2012

EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Claim in time and effective date of termination The Claimants were summarily dismissed with immediate effect on 5 October 2010. They appealed; and while their appeals were otherwise unsuccessful they were told that the date of termination of their employment would be the date of the appeal (4 November); and they … Continue reading Hawes and Curtis Ltd v Arfan and Another: EAT 1 Jun 2012

McCabe v Cornwall County Council, The Governing Body of Mounts Bay School: CA 23 Dec 2002

The claimant sought damages for the consequences of having been suspended from work as a teacher. He later recovered damages for unfair dismissal, and the court had struck out his claim for damages over and above those already awarded. Held: There is no absolute bar against a claim for damages not covered by the Employment … Continue reading McCabe v Cornwall County Council, The Governing Body of Mounts Bay School: CA 23 Dec 2002

Qua v John Ford Morrison (Solicitors): EAT 14 Jan 2003

The claimant appealed the refusal of her claim for a finding that her dismissal was automatically unfair. She had been employed for less than a year, and had taken several absences to care for her child. She claimed protection saying that her absences had been ‘dependants leave’. Held: When considering such a claim, the tribunal … Continue reading Qua v John Ford Morrison (Solicitors): EAT 14 Jan 2003