Click the case name for better results:

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

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

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

Peninsula Business Services Ltd v Rees and Others: EAT 21 Apr 2011

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALReasonableness of dismissalS.98A(2) Employment Rights Act 1996The new Employment Tribunal on remission from the EAT correctly found the Claimants were unfairly dismissed for redundancy. It correctly construed s 98A(2) as not applicable where the Respondent failed to complete Step 2 of the SDDP: Davies applied. Judges: McMullen QC J Citations: [2011] UKEAT 0407 … Continue reading Peninsula Business Services Ltd v Rees and Others: EAT 21 Apr 2011

Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust v Roldan: EAT 2 Sep 2009

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALS.98A(2) ERAPolkey deductionContributory faultThe Employment Tribunal erred when if found procedural defects in the investigation by the Respondent of the allegations of the Claimant’s misconduct. In any event it ought to have allowed evidence and considered Employment Rights Act 1996 s 98A(2).It wrongly awarded compensation beyond the 6 weeks it found it would … Continue reading Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust v Roldan: EAT 2 Sep 2009

Birdwell Primary School v Fitzgerald: EAT 28 May 2009

EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS: 2002 Act and pre-action requirementsA teacher was given notice to terminate her limited-term contract of employment before a meeting to discuss it. The Employment Tribunal correctly found this was a breach of the 2002 Act regime and automatically unfair contrary to Employment Rights Act 1996 s98A. The correct sequence is this: the … Continue reading Birdwell Primary School v Fitzgerald: EAT 28 May 2009

Smith Knight Fay Ltd v McCoy: EAT 5 Mar 2009

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissalS.98A(2) ERA Polkey deduction The employee was told at a meeting that he or his post would be made redundant at a meeting; but he was not then made redundant; further meetings followed before he was given notice of dismissal. The Employment Tribunal found (1) that the dismissal was … Continue reading Smith Knight Fay Ltd v McCoy: EAT 5 Mar 2009

Punch Pub Company Ltd v O’Neill: EAT 23 Jul 2010

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

Masson v Meggitt Avionics Ltd: EAT 25 Oct 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

HCL Safety Ltd v Flaherty: EAT 11 Jul 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

London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Wooster: EAT 10 Sep 2009

EAT AGE DISCRIMINATIONUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Polkey deductionCouncil employee seconded to registered social landlord – Secondment comes to an end, so that he is formally redundant – Employee aged 49 and would be entitled to an early retirement pension if retained in employment to age 50 – Council fails to find him alternative employment or to … Continue reading London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Wooster: EAT 10 Sep 2009

Masson v Meggitt Avionics Ltd: EAT 3 Aug 2012

masson_meggittEAT2012 EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALDismissal for lack of capabilityAutomatic unfair dismissalAppeal against decision of Employment Tribunal that R did not unfairly dismiss A for lack of capability. No finding made by ET as to whether R contemplated dismissing A before 5 April 2009 and therefore whether Employment Rights Act 1996, s.98A applied. Further, no express finding … Continue reading Masson v Meggitt Avionics Ltd: EAT 3 Aug 2012

Tameside Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Mylott: EAT 11 Mar 2011

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – S. 98A (2) Employment Rights Act DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability related discrimination DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Compensation Claimant goes off sick following incident of alleged offensive behaviour by manager – Existing mental health difficulties exacerbated – Employers fail, despite recommendation from occupational health department, to carry out … Continue reading Tameside Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Mylott: EAT 11 Mar 2011

Royal Bank of Scotland v Donaghay: EAT 11 Nov 2011

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALSEX DISCRIMINATION – ComparisonUnfair dismissal – misconduct. Claimant assaulted girlfriend (also RBS employee) in circumstances where he alleged he had been provoked by her having slapped him. Sex discrimination. Circumstances in which Employment Tribunal were held to have erred in requiring misconduct, for the purposes of s.98(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, … Continue reading Royal Bank of Scotland v Donaghay: EAT 11 Nov 2011

Lambert v Vicomte Bernard De Romanet Ltd: EAT 18 Mar 2011

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALProcedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissalCompensationContributory faultUnfair Dismissal under s98A(1) and 98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996. Employment Tribunal find 100% contribution and deduction under s123(1). No compensatory award (save in respect of loss of statutory rights).No error in Employment Tribunal approach. Ingram (UKEAT/0601/06. 23 April 2007. Elias P) considered and followed. Citations: [2011] UKEAT 0501 … Continue reading Lambert v Vicomte Bernard De Romanet Ltd: EAT 18 Mar 2011

Greenwood v NWF Retail Ltd: EAT 18 Feb 2011

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke An Employment Tribunal decision must comply in both form and substance with 30(6) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 SI No. 1861 and failure to do so will amount to an error of law; Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd v Wilcox [2006] EWCA … Continue reading Greenwood v NWF Retail Ltd: EAT 18 Feb 2011

Norman and Another v NWF Retail Ltd: EAT 18 Feb 2011

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke An Employment Tribunal decision must comply in both form and substance with 30(6) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 SI No. 1861 and failure to do so will amount to an error of law; Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd v Wilcox [2006] EWCA … Continue reading Norman and Another v NWF Retail Ltd: EAT 18 Feb 2011

Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Marks: EAT 23 Nov 2010

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL Reasonableness of dismissal S.98A(2) ERA Claimant dismissed for gross misconduct. Employment Tribunal found unfair dismissal but (a) placed the burden of proof on the Respondent instead of applying a neutral burden of proof. It also misunderstood s.98A(2) ERA 1996; failed to make a Polkey finding; failed to make a finding on contributory … Continue reading Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Marks: EAT 23 Nov 2010

Muchesa v Central and Cecil Housing Care Support: EAT 22 Aug 2008

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Automatically unfair reasons PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke The employee claimed that she had been dismissed for making protected disclosures and that her dismissal was unfair under s98A(1) and 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA). She failed on protected disclosure; the dismissal was unfair under s98A(1) but if a proper … Continue reading Muchesa v Central and Cecil Housing Care Support: EAT 22 Aug 2008

Selvarajan v Wilmot and others: CA 23 Jul 2008

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

Sandsfield Gravel Co Ltd v Loving: EAT 28 Apr 2009

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Reasonableness of dismissal / Mitigation of lossSTATUTORY DISCIPLINE AND GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES – Whether infringedAn Employment Tribunal had correctly held that the failure of an employer to provide adequate details of the complaints against an employee vitiated the disciplinary proceedings so that the dismissal was automatically unfair by virtue of Section 98A Employment … Continue reading Sandsfield Gravel Co Ltd v Loving: EAT 28 Apr 2009

McCall v Northern Rail Ltd: EAT 25 Jan 2007

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Reasonableness of dismissalPractice and Procedure – 2002 Act and pre-action requirementsThe Respondent dismissed the Claimant for three reasons. On appeal, two of the most serious fell away but the reason for dismissal remained the same. At the Employment Tribunal it was held that the procedure was unfair, but was rescued by … Continue reading McCall v Northern Rail Ltd: EAT 25 Jan 2007

Patel v Leicester City Council: EAT 20 Dec 2006

EAT Unfair dismissal – Automatically unfair reasonsA procedure will only have been completed within the meaning of section 98A(1)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 if it has been completed in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 2 to the Employment Act 2002. Citations: [2006] UKEAT 0368 – 06 – 2012 Links: Bailii Citing: Cited … Continue reading Patel v Leicester City Council: EAT 20 Dec 2006

Patel v Leicester City Council: EAT 20 Nov 2006

EAT Unfair dismissal – Automatically unfair reasonsA procedure will only have been completed within the meaning of section 98A(1)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 if it has been completed in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 2 to the Employment Act 2002. Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Keith Citations: [2006] UKEAT 0368 – 06 … Continue reading Patel v Leicester City Council: EAT 20 Nov 2006

Masterfoods (A Division of Mars UK Ltd) v Wilson: EAT 7 Aug 2006

EAT Unfair dismissal – Reasonableness of dismissal; Procedural Fairness/automatically unfair dismissal Practice and Procedure – Amendment Employment Tribunal’s conclusion of unfairness could not be criticised and was correct, especially as unappealed findings would make the dismissal unfair in any event by reason of the manager’s closed mind and failure to conduct proper investigations. Claimant wished … Continue reading Masterfoods (A Division of Mars UK Ltd) v Wilson: EAT 7 Aug 2006

Mason v Ward End Primary School: EAT 12 Apr 2006

EAT Unfair Dismissal: Procedural Fairness/Automatically Unfair Dismissal; Compensation The reversal of Polkey . . 1987) IRLR 503 effected by Employment Rights Act 1996 s98A(2) applies to dismissals occurring on or after 1 October 2004. It applies to a failure to follow a procedure or policy covering dismissal, whether in writing or existing by custom and … Continue reading Mason v Ward End Primary School: EAT 12 Apr 2006

Pudney v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd: EAT 22 Mar 2006

EAT Unfair Dismissal: Procedural Fairness/Automatically Unfair Dismissal The failure to disclose new witness statements obtained during the adjournment of an internal appeal against dismissal was a breach of the employer’s written procedure, and fell outside the band of reasonable responses. Strouthos v London Underground Ltd [2004] IRLR 636 CA applied. The Employment Tribunal Judgment was … Continue reading Pudney v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd: EAT 22 Mar 2006

George v London Borough of Brent (Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of Dismissal): EAT 8 Jan 2016

UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal The summary of the approach to compensation at paragraph 54 of the Judgment of a division of this Tribunal presided over by Elias J in Software 2000 Ltd v Andrews [2007] ICR 825, whilst impeccable at the time, now needs to be treated with some caution, at least in … Continue reading George v London Borough of Brent (Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of Dismissal): EAT 8 Jan 2016

Shergold v Fieldway Medical Centre: EAT 5 Dec 2005

The claimant had submitted a grievance complaining in general terms of the way in which she had been treated by a manager. She did not, however, refer to a particular incident relied on in her pleading as one of the two ‘last straw’ incidents that led to her resignation. The respondent contended that by reason … Continue reading Shergold v Fieldway Medical Centre: EAT 5 Dec 2005

Alexander and Hatherley v Bridgen Enterprises Ltd: EAT 12 Apr 2006

The company made selections for redundancy, but failed to give the appellants information about how the scoring system had resulted in the figures allocated. The calculations left their representative unable to challenge them on appeal. The procedure adopted did not follow the statutory rules, but the tribunal had found the dismissals to be fair. The … Continue reading Alexander and Hatherley v Bridgen Enterprises Ltd: EAT 12 Apr 2006

Roberts v Acumed Ltd: EAT 25 Nov 2010

roberts_acumedEAT10 EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL Reason for dismissal including substantial other reason Reasonableness of dismissal Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissal The Claimant area sales manager was remunerated on a different basis from the other four area managers. His commission was based on total sales whereas theirs was based on annual increase in sales. On reviewing remuneration the … Continue reading Roberts v Acumed Ltd: EAT 25 Nov 2010

Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones: EAT 29 Jul 1982

Members of the tribunal must not simply consider whether they personally think that the dismissal is fair and they must not substitute their decision as to what was the right course to adopt for that of the employer. Their proper function is to determine whether the decision to dismiss the employee fell within the band … Continue reading Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones: EAT 29 Jul 1982

Renton v Cantor Fitzgerald Europe: EAT 18 Jul 2012

renton_cantorEAT2012 EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALUNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGESVICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – WhistleblowingIn this case the claim that the dismissal was due to a protected disclosure failed but the Claimant succeeded in his claim for unfair dismissal under section 98 and 98A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Appellant’s argument as to the adequacy of the reasons … Continue reading Renton v Cantor Fitzgerald Europe: EAT 18 Jul 2012

Swallow Security Services Ltd v Millicent: EAT 19 Mar 2009

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Contributory faultThe employers dismissed the employee after a bogus redundancy exercise, after she had knowingly taken paid holiday in excess of her holiday allowance and failed to apologise. The Tribunal found that she had been unfairly dismissed, of its own volition raised Polkey but did not raise or consider contributory fault which … Continue reading Swallow Security Services Ltd v Millicent: EAT 19 Mar 2009