Click the case name for better results:

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

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

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

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 . .

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

Bhatt v Chelsea and Westminster Health Care Trust and Another: EAT 9 Sep 1997

The tribunal must first decide if a renewal of a fixed term contract was an extension or a re-engagement before deciding if unfair dismissal was possible: ‘We accept the submission that a contract for a fixed term may be extended as to its term, leaving the same contract in place. We accept too, that when … Continue reading Bhatt v Chelsea and Westminster Health Care Trust and Another: EAT 9 Sep 1997

Prudential Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Another: SC 23 Jan 2013

The appellants resisted disclosure to the revenue of advice it had received. It claimed legal advice privilege (LAP), though the advice was from its accountants. Held: (Lords Sumption and Clarke dissenting) LAP applies to all communications passing between a client and its lawyers, acting in their professional capacity, in connection with the provision of legal … Continue reading Prudential Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Another: SC 23 Jan 2013

Affleck and Others v Newcastle Mind and Others: EAT 10 Mar 1999

EAT Employees of an unincorporated charitable association are employed by the management committee or other similar body within the association, and not by the members of the association at large. The employees have continuity of employment despite any change in the constitution of the committee. In practice such actions should be brought against a representative … Continue reading Affleck and Others v Newcastle Mind and Others: EAT 10 Mar 1999

Celtec Limited v John Astley Julie Owens, Deborah Lynn Hawkes: EAT 5 Oct 2001

The employer appealed a finding that there had been continuity of employment between itself and a previous employer. The employees had sought a statement as to their terms of employment. The employer was a training and enterprise council, to whom the employees had first been seconded from the Department of Employment. There was an unresolved … Continue reading Celtec Limited v John Astley Julie Owens, Deborah Lynn Hawkes: EAT 5 Oct 2001

Smith v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: EAT 15 Oct 1999

The claimant had been sole director of a company which went into liquidation. He sought a redundancy payment from the respondent under the 1996 Act. It was refused. The tribunal had applied Buchan. It had refused to hear an argument that the tribunal chairman was also employed by the respondent and could not therefore be … Continue reading Smith v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: EAT 15 Oct 1999

Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council v Scanlon: EAT 22 May 2007

Unfair dismissal – Automatically unfair reasons/ Reasonableness of dismissal Appeal on the grounds that the Employment Tribunal had not applied the correct statutory tests of causation under s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996 and s.4(1) Sex Discrimination Act 1975 upheld. The Employment Tribunal erred in finding only a causation link and failed to apply the statutory … Continue reading Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council v Scanlon: EAT 22 May 2007

Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Rutherford and Another; Same v Bentley: EAT 2 Oct 2003

The claimants sought to challenge the legislation which removed their employment rights upon attaining the age of 65, arguing that this was discriminatory against men. The Secretary of State appealed the tribunal’s decision. Held: The tribunal had selected the wrong set of comparators. In cases where the issue related to the entitlement to redundancy payments … Continue reading Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Rutherford and Another; Same v Bentley: EAT 2 Oct 2003

Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti: SC 27 Nov 2019

The employee was a whistleblower, but her manager in response bullied her and dismissed her on the grounds of alleged poor performance. J suffered stress and was away from work and unable to defend herself. The decision maker, acting honestly dismissed her. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal holding that that a tribunal required … Continue reading Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti: SC 27 Nov 2019

Nosworthy v Instinctif Partners Ltd: EAT 28 Feb 2019

UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGES CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Implied term/variation/construction of term The Claimant was given a small shareholding in her employer as a condition of its sale to the Respondent and sold the shares to them under a Share Purchase Agreement. Part of the consideration for the shares were deferred earn-out shares and loan … Continue reading Nosworthy v Instinctif Partners Ltd: EAT 28 Feb 2019

Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artide Plastics Ltd: 1941

There is no justification for artificially excising from the damages recoverable for breach of contract that part of the financial loss which might or might not be the subject of a successful claim in defamation. A claim for mere loss of reputation is properly for an action for defamation, and cannot ordinarily be sustained by … Continue reading Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artide Plastics Ltd: 1941