The bank claimed that it had been defrauded, and that since an employee of the defendant had taken part in the fraud the defendant was had vicarious liability for his participation even though they knew nothing of it. Held: Where A becomes liable to B as a joint tortfeasor with C in the tort of … Continue reading Generale Bank Nederland Nv (Formerly Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland Nv) v Export Credit Guarantee Department: CA 23 Jul 1997
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
Damages or removal of coal under land User damages were awarded for the unauthorised removal of coal from beneath the appellant’s land, even though the site was too small for the appellant to have mined the coal himself. The appellant was also awarded damages for the damage done to the houses on the surface. If … Continue reading Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co: HL 13 Feb 1880
The parties disputed whether Mr Smith had been an employee of or worker with the company so as to bring associated rights into play. The contract required the worker to provide an alternate worker to cover if necessary. Held: The company’s appeal failed. Mr Smith was a worker: ‘there were features of the contract which … Continue reading Pimlico Plumbers Ltd and Another v Smith: SC 13 Jun 2018
The appellant had employed the three claimants in his medical surgery, but they claimed automatic unfair dismissal when the practice closed on his suspension from practice and the statutory procedures were followed but not to the procedural standard, alleging unreasonable delay in the appeals. Held: The employer’s appeal succeeded. The employees’ appeals failed. There was … Continue reading Selvarajan v Wilmot and others: CA 23 Jul 2008
The professor had sought time off to represent another lecturer claiming race discrimination against the University. The University said that her behaviour created a conflict of interest with the University. She continued and herself claimed victimisation. After the case failed, she was herself suspended, and her email account searched from which further disciplinary charges were … Continue reading Fosh v Cardiff University: EAT 23 Jan 2008
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011
(Northern Ireland) The applicant sought judicial review of a decision not to disclose documents held by the respondent to him saying that the refusal was disproportionate and infringed his human rights. The respondents said that the documents were provided on an assurance of confidentiality. Held: Disclosure rules are different in judicial review proceedings since such … Continue reading Tweed v Parades Commission for Northern Ireland: HL 13 Dec 2006
The claimant had ‘neither pleaded nor shown any damage to him during the course of his employment which resulted from his employer’s conduct. The only damage which is demonstrated is that which followed from his dismissal and, arguably, the manner of his dismissal. That damage if it exists has been held in Johnson to be … Continue reading Boardman v Copeland Borough Council: CA 13 Jun 2001
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
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
Exemplary Damages Award in Defamation The plaintiff had been awarded damages for defamation. The defendants pleaded justification. Before the trial the plaintiff gave notice that he wanted additional, exemplary, damages. The trial judge said that such a claim had to have been pleaded. The Court of Appeal had considered Rookes -v- Barnard to have been … Continue reading Cassell and Co Ltd v Broome and Another: HL 23 Feb 1972
The appellant, a part time recorder challenged his exclusion from pension arrangements. Held: The appeal was allowed. No objective justification has been shown for departing from the basic principle of remunerating part-timers pro rata temporis. ‘The reality is that recorders are expected to observe the terms and conditions of their appointment, and that they may … Continue reading O’Brien v Ministry of Justice: SC 6 Feb 2013
Minister was not an employee The claimant asserted unfair dismissal. The Conference said that as an ordained minister she was not an employee, and was outwith the jurisdiction of such a claim. Held: The Conference’s appeal succeeded (Baroness Hale dissenting). The essence of the arrangement between the Conference and a minister lay in the constitution … Continue reading Methodist Conference v Preston: SC 15 May 2013
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissal The Employment Tribunal held that the Claimant was unfairly dismissed by reason of misconduct and suffered an unlawful deduction from wages of pounds 750. Although the Employment Tribunal concluded that the Respondent had a genuine belief in the misconduct alleged and reasonable grounds for that belief, it … Continue reading Prospect v Hajee: EAT 23 Oct 2017
EAT Unfair DismissL – Reinstatement/re-engagement – UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Compensation The amount of a week’s pay for the purposes of calculating in accordance with Employment Rights Act 1996 section 124(1ZA)(b) the upper limit of compensation which may be awarded under section 123, applying section 221(2), is the amount of remuneration payable under the contract of … Continue reading University of Sunderland v Drossou (Unfair Dismissal): EAT 13 Jun 2017
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court. Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. Tanfern was limited to appeals from … Continue reading Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALReasonableness of dismissalProcedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissalThe Employment Tribunal failed to consider the effect of S98A(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Had it done so it would have been bound to find that had the Respondent followed a fair dismissal procedure the Claimant would have been dismissed in any event. Judges: Serota QC … Continue reading Punch Pub Company Ltd v O’Neill: EAT 23 Jul 2010
The defendant sought to strike out the claimant’s action in defamation. It had reported that the police had withdrawn an employment offer to claimant after doubting his immigration status. Held: The claims should be struck out. The articles were now available on the defendant’s website only by searching for it. A search would reveal three … Continue reading Budu v The British Broadcasting Corporation: QBD 23 Mar 2010
EAT Disability Discrimination: Section 15 – DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Compensation UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Polkey deduction Unfair Dismissal – Section 98 Employment Rights Act 1996 (‘ERA’) Disability Discrimination – discrimination arising from disability – section 15 Equality Act 2010 (‘EqA’) The Employment Tribunal (‘ET’) having found that the Claimant had … Continue reading Monmouthshire County Council v Harris: EAT 23 Oct 2015
The two applicants were serving life sentences for murder. Each sought damages for the unlawful withdrawal of their rights to vote in elections, and the failure of the British parliament to take steps to comply with the judgment. Held: The appeals failed.Lord Mance summarised the reasons for his conclusions: ‘(A) Human Rights Act In respect … Continue reading Chester, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 16 Oct 2013
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
EAT Jurisdictional Points : Worker, Employee or Neither – WORKING TIME REGULATIONS – Worker CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Whether established Employment status. The Claimant lodged a claim of unfair dismissal, age discrimination and a claim for holiday pay. The Respondent denied that he was an employee, arguing that he was a self-employed independent contractor. The … Continue reading Conroy v Scottish Football Association Ltd: EAT 12 Dec 2013
EAT Unfair Dismissal : Reasonableness of Dismissal – Where an Employment Tribunal concludes, as a matter of fact, that an employer has not taken into account any mitigating circumstances before applying the sanction of dismissal in a case of gross or serious misconduct and, therefore, that dismissal is not a reasonable action on the part … Continue reading Vincent (T/A Shield Security Service) v Hinder: EAT 18 Oct 2013
EAT Victimisation Discrimination : Protected Disclosure – Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in striking out part of the Claimant’s claim of detriment on the ground of having made a protected disclosure. Specifically as to whether the Tribunal approached its task correctly in concluding that part of the Claimant’s claim should be struck out … Continue reading Greenly v Future Network Solutions Ltd: EAT 19 Dec 2013
EAT Unfair Dismissal : Reasonableness of Dismissal – The Appellant contended that the EAT should lay down general guidance to the effect that an appeal panel decision must be followed by an employer in the absence of exceptional circumstances. He also contended that, if the Respondent was entitled not to follow the decision of the … Continue reading Kisoka v Ratnpinyotip (T/A Rydevale Day Nursery): EAT 11 Dec 2013
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – 2002 Act and pre-action requirements UNFAIR DISMISSAL Unfair dismissal. Application of transitional provisions in case of dismissal alleged to have been unfair under s98A Employment Rights Act 1996. Whether employers had reasonable grounds to believe in lack of capacity of senior employee. Mitting J [2013] UKEAT 0183 – 13 – 2510 … Continue reading Masson v Meggitt Avionics Ltd: EAT 25 Oct 2013
EAT S.98A(2) ERA – Unfair dismissal. The Appellant appealed against a finding that it had unfairly dismissed the Respondent. The Employment Tribunal had found that the dismissal was unfair but that in light of section 118, 119, 122 123 of ERA 1996 the Respondent was not entitled to any monetary award, basic or compensatory. The … Continue reading HCL Safety Ltd v Flaherty: EAT 11 Jul 2013
EAT Unfair Dismissal : Compensation – Correct method of calculating a week’s pay for the purposes of (a) basic award and (b) compensatory award for unfair dismissal.Appeal allowed in part; distinction drawn between the statutory regime applying to a week’s pay for the basic award under Part XIV, Chapter II Employment Rights Act 1996 and … Continue reading Toni and Guys (St Paul’s) Ltd v Georgiou: EAT 19 Jul 2013
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Worker, employee or neitherDISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – DisabilityAn Employment Tribunal dismissed claims for holiday pay and unfair dismissal apparently on the basis that the Claimant was not a worker within the Working Time Regulations nor an employee within s.230 Employment Rights Act 1996. The principal reason for doing so was a lack … Continue reading Dakin v Brighton Marina Residential Management Company Ltd and Another (Disability Discrimination : Disability): EAT 26 Apr 2013
amnesty_ahmedEAT2009 EAT RACE DISCRIMINATION – Direct discriminationRACE DISCRIMINATION – Indirect discriminationRACE DISCRIMINATION – Protected by s. 41UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissalClaimant, of (northern) Sudanese ethnic origin, applied for promotion to role of ‘Sudan researcher’ for Amnesty International – Not appointed because Amnesty believed that the appointment of a person of her ethnic origin would compromise … Continue reading Amnesty International v Ahmed: EAT 13 Aug 2009
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
On being told he was to be dismissed, Mr Jones had taken early retirement. He made a claim in the County Court that his pension had been wrongly reduced, The court rejected his allegation that he had acted under duress. His subsequent claim of unfair dismissal in the Employment ribunal was also rejected, but his … Continue reading Jones v Mid-Glamorgan County Council: CA 13 May 1997
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
fahey_plymouthEAT2012 EAT UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGESThe Respondent deducted sums from the Claimant’s pay during her notice period in respect of incapacity benefit which it assumed she would be receiving. However, before the Tribunal the Respondent did not establish any statutory or contractual requirement or authority for the deductions (see section 13 of the Employment Rights … Continue reading Fahey v Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust: EAT 23 Apr 2012
The parties disputed the effect of the NHS terms for employment of doctors, and in particularly the provisions as to maintenance of pay grade. The doctor had become a consultant trust grade doctor in oral surgery, but was then required to retrain from her qualification as a dentist. She said that she was entitled to … Continue reading Barts and The London NHS Trust v Verma: SC 24 Apr 2013
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
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL Reason for dismissal including substantial other reason Compensation DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability related discrimination The decision of the Employment Tribunal that the dismissal of the Claimant pastry chef for using non-kosher jam in a product sold in an establishment subject to requirements of Kedassia was an act of victimisation under the Equality … Continue reading Carmelli Bakeries Ltd v Benali (Unfair Dismissal : Reason for Dismissal Including Substantial Other): EAT 31 Jul 2013
Car Valeters contracts misdescribed their Duties The claimants worked cleaning cars for the appellants. They said that as workers they were entitled to holiday pay. The appellant said they were self-employed. Held: The contract purported to give rights which were not genuine, and the employment judge was entitled to reach that conclusion. The contractors were … Continue reading Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher and Others: CA 13 Oct 2009
Uninsured Driver Not Guilty of Causing Death The appellant though an uninsured driver, was driving without fault when another vehicle veered across the road. The other driver died from his injuries, and the appellant convicted of causing his death whilst uninsured. At trial he succeeded in arguing that he had not caused the death, but … Continue reading Hughes, Regina v: SC 31 Jul 2013
The employees asserted unauthorised deductions from their wages. The company appealed against an order re-instating their claims. When employed by the council, the claimants had the right to pay increases in accordance with rates set by national negotiations, and claimed the benefit of increases negotiated after they had been transferred to the appellant. The employer … Continue reading Parkwood Leisure Ltd v Alemo-Herron and 23 Others: CA 29 Jan 2010
The claimants complained of the system where they were obliged to work for free to claim Jobseekers Allowance. Held: The 2011 Regulations were required to specify the schemes under which the claimants were to claim. Instead, the regulations had named a scheme of work and the details of it were set out elsewhere. This did … Continue reading Reilly and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 12 Feb 2013
Each claimant had graduated from a tertiary college and wished to stay on in the UK. They challenged the points based system for assessing elgibility introduced in 2008 after they had commenced their studies. The new rules tightened the criteria for staying. Held: The appeals succeeded. By 1969, immigration rules had by law shed the … Continue reading Secretary of State for The Home Department v Pankina: CA 23 Jun 2010
The parties disputed the effective date of termination of the claimant’s employment. Was it the date on which the letter notifying her was sent, or was it on the day she received it. She had been dimissed without notice, and the date was the date on which it took effect. The court was asked whether … Continue reading Gisda Cyf v Barratt: SC 13 Oct 2010
The claimant contended for a common law remedy covering the same ground as the statutory right available to him under the Employment Rights Act 1996 through the Employment Tribunal system. Held: The statutory system for compensation for unfair dismissal is a complete system, and was intended to replace any common law action for damages arising … Continue reading Johnson v Unisys Ltd: HL 23 Mar 2001
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
In this case, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) was asked to interpret Section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (the 1996 Act) and decide whether in failing to place an employee whose post had become redundant on a list of workers whose . .
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
An employer’s express right to transfer an employee may be qualified by the obligation of mutual trust and confidence. Citations: [1989] IRLR 507 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Johnson v Unisys Ltd HL 23-Mar-2001 The claimant contended for a common law remedy covering the same ground as the statutory right available to … Continue reading United Bank Ltd v Akhtar: 1989
The claimant had been dismissed. He said the manner of his dismissal had caused him to suffer a mental breakdown, and claimed for loss of earnings. He asserted a duty on an employer not to dismiss him in such a way as to infringe the duty of trust and confidence. He succeeded in a claim … Continue reading Johnson v Unisys Limited: CA 4 Dec 1998
The Claimant was dismissed by the Appellant immediately prior to a TUPE transfer from the Appellant to a third party. He brought a claim for unfair dismissal against the Appellant alone in which he claimed that his dismissal was unfair in terms of Regulation 7(1) of TUPE. The Appellant conceded that the dismissal of the … Continue reading Greater Glasgow Health Board v Neilson (Transfer of Undertakings; Dismissal; Remedies; Re-Engagement): EAT 16 Feb 2021
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
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
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio A claim was made for the price of goods which the plaintiff sold to the defendant in Dunkirk, knowing that the defendant’s purpose was to smuggle the goods into England. The plaintiff was met with a defence of illegality. Held: The defence failed. Knowledge on the part of the … Continue reading Holman v Johnson: 5 Jul 1775
The deceased’s adult son sought provision from the intestate estate. The sole beneficiary under the rules was the plaintiff’s mother. The estate was modest; the intestate’s interest in his house (he had been living there with the plaintiff). The widow was found to have a one third interest in it. The judge took the disposable … Continue reading In Re Coventry (deceased): CA 3 Jan 1979
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
The applicant had been born and registered as a female, but later came to receive treatment and to live as a male. He complained that the respondent had failed to amend his birth certificate. Held: The court accepted that, by failing to confer on a transsexual a right to an amended birth certificate, the state … Continue reading Rees v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Oct 1986
A Church of England Assistant Curate is not an employee, but rather a holder of an ecclesiastical office. There is a presumption that ministers of religion were office-holders who did not serve under a contract of employment. Accordingly he is not entitled to claim to have been unfairly dismissed under the legislation. Mummery LJ said: … Continue reading Reverend Doctor A B Coker v Diocese of Southwark; Bishop of Southwark and Diocesan Board of Finance: CA 11 Jul 1997
The claimant had been an ordained minister in the church. She sought to claim unfair dismissal. The Conference replied that she was not an employee entitled to make such a claim. Held: The claimant was an employee. Judges: Maurice Kay VP, Longmore LJJ, Sir David Keene Citations: [2011] EWCA Civ 1581, [2012] 2 WLR 1119, … Continue reading The President of The Methodist Conference v Preston: CA 20 Dec 2011
The claimant alleged that she had been discrimated against in her work for the appellant, a member of the diplomatic staff at the Saudi Embassy in London. She now appealed against a decision that the respondent had diplomatic immunity. Held: The appeal was allowed: ‘the question whether the exception in article 31(1)(c) would have applied … Continue reading Reyes v Al-Malki and Another: SC 18 Oct 2017
Employee, Worker or Self-Employed – Section 230, (B) Employment Rights Act 1996 The claimant was elected to office as a non-executive director of the first respondent; it was his case that he suffered detriments as a result of making protected disclosures and he sought to bring a claim before the Employment Tribunal (‘ET’) under section … Continue reading Catt v English Table Tennis Association Ltd and Others: EAT 26 Aug 2022
The claimant had argued that she had been unfairly dismissed since her dismissal was founded in her making a protected disclosure. The ET had not accepted either her explanation or that of the employer. Held: The employee’s appeal failed, and the employer’s succeeded. It was wrong to draw parallels with prohibited grounds reasons and unfair … Continue reading Kuzel v Roche Products Ltd: CA 17 Apr 2008
Lord Cairns said: ‘A reason for the dismissal of an employee is a set of facts known to the employer, or it may be of beliefs held by him, which cause him to dismiss the employee. If at the time of his dismissal the employer gives a reason for it, that is no doubt evidence, … Continue reading Abernethy v Mott Hay and Anderson: CA 1974
The various insured defendants had been driven in the insured vehicles by a non-insured driver. Suffering injury at the negligence of the driver, they recovered variously damages. Their insurance companies sought recovery of the sums paid from their respective insureds under the policy terms, section 151 and under European law. Appeals and cross appeals were … Continue reading Churchill Insurance Company Ltd v Wilkinson and Others: CA 19 May 2010
The defendant implemented a voluntary retirement scheme under which benefits were calculated according to the period of service of the employee. The plaintiff claimed that the scheme discriminated against workers who had taken career breaks, and therefore against women. Held: A severance pay scheme, which calculated the amount payable according to length of service and … Continue reading Barry v Midland Bank Plc: HL 22 Jul 1999
The court was asked: ‘Was it unlawful for the Secretary of State for Health, the respondent, who had power to make provisions for the functioning of the National Health Service in England, to have failed to make a provision which would have enabled women who were citizens of the UK, but who were usually resident … Continue reading A and B, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health: SC 14 Jun 2017
The claimant had been employed through an employment agency to carry out work for the respondent. He appealed against dismissal of his appeal against a ruling that he was not a worker for the respondent under the 1996 Act. He said that the Employment judge had not given him appropriate assistance as a litigant in … Continue reading Muschett v HM Prison Service: CA 2 Feb 2010
The claimant worked for the local authority under a series of contracts. The employer denied that she had been continuously employed and there was no ‘irreducible minimum mutual obligation necessary to create a contract of service’. There were times when she had no work. Held: Given the authorities there was ample reason to find a … Continue reading Cornwall County Council v Prater: CA 24 Feb 2006
A nurse was employed under a contract, under which there was no mutuality of obligation; she could refuse work and employer need offer none. This meant that there was no employment capable of allowing an unfair dismissal issue to arise.Sir Christopher Slade summarised as follows: ‘Principles governing appeals from an industrial tribunal At first impression … Continue reading Clark v Oxfordshire Health Authority: CA 18 Dec 1997
Tour guides were engaged to act ‘on a casual as required basis’. The guides later claimed to be employees and therefore entitled by statute to a written statement of their terms of employment. Their case was that an exchange of correspondence between the parties in March 1989 constituted a contract, which was to be classified … Continue reading Carmichael and Another v National Power Plc: HL 24 Jun 1999
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014
Solicitor Firm Member was a Protected Worker The solicitor appellant had been a member of the firm, a limited liability partnership. She disclosed criminal misbehaviour by a partner in a branch in Africa. On dismissal she sought protection as a whistleblower. This was rejected, it being found that a member of such a firm was … Continue reading Clyde and Co LLP and Another v van Winkelhof: SC 21 May 2014
The plaintiff was a manager within the social services department. He suffered a mental breakdown in 1986, and had four months off work. His employers had refused to provide the increased support he requested. He had returned to work, but again, did not receive the staff or guidance to allow him to do the work … Continue reading Walker v Northumberland County Council: QBD 16 Nov 1994
The claimant, a consultant surgeon had been subject to disciplinary proceedings by his employer. They were however conducted in a manner which breached his contract. The GMC had summarily dismissed the same allegations. The claimant now appealed against an award by the county court judge which had limited his damages to loss of earnings only. … Continue reading Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust: QBD 31 Jul 2009
The various claimants sought to challenge the 2004 Act by way of judicial review on the grounds that it was ‘a disproportionate, unnecessary and illegitimate interference with their rights to choose how they conduct their lives, and with market freedoms protected by European law; and an unjust interference with economic rights.’ Held: ‘We have concluded … Continue reading Countryside Alliance and others v HM Attorney General and others: Admn 29 Jul 2005
EAT TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS: Acquired rights directive TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS: Varying terms of employment As a matter of construction of TUPE Reg 5(1), a contractual term entitling employees to pay ‘in accordance with collective agreements negotiated from time to time by [the NJC]’ is protected on a TUPE transfer to the private sector so as … Continue reading Alemo-Herron v Parkwood Leisure Ltd: EAT 12 Jan 2009
EAT Sex Discrimination – Inferring DiscriminationThe claimant sought compenstion for sex discrimination. She appealed a finding of a material factor justifying the difference in pay. Held: The new provisions included reference to the Code of Practice issued by the Equal Opportunities Commission, which provided that the employer should provide a transparent system for setting pay … Continue reading Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd: EAT 6 Mar 2003
The court was asked as to whether the provisions for the reversal of the burden of proof in discrimination cases was limited to findings of discrimination or extended also to issues of victimisation, and as to whether section 5A had properly incorporated the European Directive. Held: The test in section 54A and in Igen v … Continue reading Oyarce v Cheshire County Council: CA 2 May 2008
An industrial tribunal hearing conducted behind the locked doors of the chairman’s office was not held in public, even if, in fact, no member of the public was prevented from attending. The obligation to sit in public was fundamental, and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to conduct itself in this way. The industrial tribunal system … Continue reading Storer v British Gas plc: CA 25 Feb 2000
The appellant appealed a finding that the respondent had been its employee, saying he was a minister of religion. Held: The judge had been entitled to find an intention to create legal relations, and therefore that the claimant was an employee. ‘The religious beliefs of a community may be such that their manifestation does not … Continue reading The New Testament Church of God v Reverend Stewart: CA 19 Oct 2007
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Constructive dismissalMaternity Rights and Parental Leave – Sex discriminationThe Claimant was employed as a Magistrates’ Clerk and she brought successful claims to the Employment Tribunal that:(a) Ms Slee (‘the Claimant’) had been constructively unfairly dismissed by The Department for Constitutional Affairs (‘the Respondent’);(b) The Respondent had failed to offer to the … Continue reading Secretary of State for Justice v Slee: EAT 19 Jul 2007
EAT Preliminary issues The EAT concludes that in construing the statutory definition of ‘worker’ for the purposes of the provisions providing protection for protected disclosures under Part IV A of the Employment Rights Act 1996, it is appropriate to adopt a purposive approach. Accordingly, where an individual supplies his services to an employment agency through … Continue reading Croke v Hydro Aluminium Worcester Ltd: EAT 4 Apr 2007
Unfair Dismissal, Practice and Procedure – The EAT considered the meaning of s. 124(5) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and concluded that payments to account should be deducted from the overall award before the applying the statutory cap even if that meant that the employer did not get any benefit from payments to account. … Continue reading Dafiaghor-Olomu v Community Integrated Care: EAT 1 Jun 2022
EAT Practice and Procedure: No case to Answer and Public Interest Disclosure:The Employment Tribunal erred in acceding to a half-time submission of no case made in a whistle-blowing claim. Whistle-blowing is a form of discrimination claim (see Lucas v Chichester UKEAT/0713/04) and it should normally be heard in full: Logan v The Commissioners of Customs … Continue reading Boulding v Land Securities Trillium (Media Services) Ltd: EAT 3 May 2006
The employer appealed against findings of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The employee worked in IT. He was profoundly deaf, but could lip read and read sign language. He had been accused of obtaining improper access to a senior staff member’s emails. During the disciplinary hearing, he had been assisted by an interpreter for part … Continue reading Taylor v OCS Group Ltd: CA 31 May 2006
The claimants were dependants of Iraqi nationals killed in Iraq. Held: The Military Police were operating when Britain was an occupying power. The question in each case was whether the Human Rights Act applied to the acts of the defendant. The question amounted to whether the officers acted under State Agent Authority within the convention … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of Mazin Mumaa Galteh Al-Skeini and Others) v The Secretary of State for Defence: CA 21 Dec 2005
EAT Unfair Dismissal Unfair Dismissal – redundancy – unfair selection due to lack of adequate individual consultation – no error of law. Judges: His Honour Judge Peter Clark Citations: [2005] UKEAT 0361 – 05 – 0410, UKEAT/0361/05 Links: Bailii, EAT Cited by: See Also – Knapton and others v ECC Card Clothing Ltd EAT 7-Mar-2006 … Continue reading ECC Card Clothing Ltd v Knapton and Another: EAT 4 Oct 2005
The applicant was employed by the respondent who had a collective agreement with a trade union. Held: Not all elements of the collective agreement need be intended to be legally enforceable. She complained that the collective agreement would have protected her from compulsory redundancy. Keene LJ said: ‘the words relied on by the respondent . … Continue reading Kaur v MG Rover Group Ltd: CA 17 Nov 2004
The claimant suffered back pain for which she required neurosurgery. The operation was associated with a 1-2% risk of the cauda equina syndrome, of which she was not warned. She went ahead with the surgery, and suffered that complication. The evidence established that cauda equina syndrome was a random and inherent risk of the surgery, … Continue reading Chester v Afshar: HL 14 Oct 2004
The applicant questioned the compatibility of s185 of the 1996 Act with Human Rights law. The family sought emergency housing. The child of the family, found to be in priority housing need, was subject also to immigration control. Though the matter had been settled the court was invited to pursue the decision. Held: The Act … Continue reading Morris, Regina (on the Application of) v Westminster City Council and Another: Admn 7 Oct 2004
The two employees who, after they were dismissed and their complaints of unfair dismissal were upheld by an industrial tribunal, but before the assessment of compensation, disclosed allegedly confidential information about their former employers to a national newspaper in breach of their continuing obligation of confidentiality under their contract of employment. The court was asked … Continue reading Soros and Another v Davison and Another: EAT 24 Jan 1994
The EAT considered the effect of the receipt of benefits during a period of sickness when calculating loss of earnings, and whether a hearing was properly conducted without the presence of the parties. Held: There is no procedural irregularity in the Tribunal members holding a meeting in the absence of the parties for the purposes … Continue reading Puglia v C James and Sons: EAT 24 Oct 1995
The tribunal set out the test for whether a dismissal was for redundancy: ‘Free of authority, we understand the statutory framework . . involve a three-stage process: (1) was the employee dismissed: If so, (2) had the requirements of the employer’s business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind ceased or diminished, … Continue reading Safeway Stores Plc v Burrell: EAT 24 Jan 1997
Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed. Held: The appeal failed (Lord Carnworth dissenting). That the exact situation might not have … Continue reading The United States of America v Nolan: SC 21 Oct 2015
The claimant was employed, receiving a basic pay together with commission on sales. After termination of his employment he complained that he should have been paid holiday pay based upon the average total pay rather than the basic pay. Held: The right to holiday pay arose under the Regulations, but the pay was calculated under … Continue reading Evans v Malley Organisation Ltd (t/a First Business Support): CA 27 Nov 2002
The defendant claimed that he had gone absent without leave from the RAF as a conscientous objector. Held: The defendant had not demonstrated by complaint to the RAF that he did object to service in Iraq. In some circumstances where there was no procedure to make his objection known, the failure to do so might … Continue reading Khan v Royal Air Force Summary Appeal Court: Admn 7 Oct 2004
In a protected disclosure case, time runs from the occurrence of the alleged detriment and not from the alleged disclosure.Lord Nimmo Smith said: ‘It would appear to us to be consistent with the main purpose of the 1998 Act to approach the matter in this way, as to construe it in the manner suggested by … Continue reading Stolt Offshore Ltd v Miklaszewicz: SCS 21 Dec 2001
EAT Judge McMullen QC adopted a limited view of the scope of the new principle of stable employment set out at the ECJ and HL. He thought it was intended ‘to rescue employees who do not have a permanent job’; and that it was confined to cases of the kind considered by the ECJ, that … Continue reading Preston and others v Wolverhampton Healthcare NHS Trust and others: EAT 3 Nov 2003
EAT Unfair Dismissal – CompensationIn each case, The employee sought additional damages for non-economic loss after an unfair dismissal. Held: The Act could be compared with the Discrimination Acts which explicitly awarded damages for hurt feelings. Clear authority lay against such awards in unfair dismissal cases. An Employment Tribunal considering a claim for damages for … Continue reading Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council; Williams v Southampton Institute; Dawson v Stonham Housing Association: EAT 8 Apr 2003
The appellants were journalists and other workers, and members of trades unions. Their employers had de-recognised the unions, paying sums to buy out those rights. The claimants had not surrendered their rights, and had been paid less because of it. Held: The Act did not protect the employees rights of association as guaranteed by article … Continue reading Wilson and NUJ, Palmer, Wyeth and RMT, Doolan and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 2 Jul 2002
