Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Secretary of the Central Office of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales), ex parte Public Concern at Work: QBD 9 May 2000

The Central Office of Tribunals must record the particulars of Employment Tribunal decisions. It has in the past recorded the existence of the application but no details. The court held that the register must include details of the parties, the particulars of the allegations made, and the full text of the decision where recorded. The … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of the Central Office of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales), ex parte Public Concern at Work: QBD 9 May 2000

Regina v Regional Office of the Employment Tribunals (London North), Ex p Sojorin (unreported): CA 21 Feb 2000

The Employment Appeal Tribunal is immune from judicial review. Judges: Sedley LJ Citations: Unreported, 21 February 2000 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Cart v The Upper Tribunal SC 21-Jun-2011 Limitations to Judicial Reviw of Upper Tribunal Three claimants sought to challenge decisions of various Upper Tribunals by way of judicial review. In … Continue reading Regina v Regional Office of the Employment Tribunals (London North), Ex p Sojorin (unreported): CA 21 Feb 2000

Helen Percy v An Order and Judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Dated 22 March 1999: SCS 20 Mar 2001

Mrs Percy was a minister in the church. She appealed rejection of her claim for unfair dismissal and sex discrimination. Held: the court considered whether Ms Percy was employed by the Board of National Mission in terms of a ‘contract personally to execute any work or labour’. After reviewing the authorities the Lord President enunciated … Continue reading Helen Percy v An Order and Judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Dated 22 March 1999: SCS 20 Mar 2001

Taylor v Against an Order and Judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal: SCS 18 Dec 1998

The claimant prison officer had continued beyond the normal retirement age, but subject to a discretion and review. The service changed its retirement policy. He now challenged the requirement that he retire. Judges: Caplan L Citations: [1998] ScotCS 103, [1999] SCLR 263, [1999] IRLR 362 Links: Bailii Citing: Cited – Wandsworth London Borough Council v … Continue reading Taylor v Against an Order and Judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal: SCS 18 Dec 1998

McMeechan v Secretary of State for Employment: CA 11 Dec 1996

The respondent as a temporary worker was entitled to be treated as an employee of an agency within the contract governing the particular engagement where money was due when the agency went into liquidation. He was therefore able to claim against the respondent as such on that insolvency. A temporary worker might be an employee … Continue reading McMeechan v Secretary of State for Employment: CA 11 Dec 1996

Secretary of State for Employment v Spence: CA 1986

The employers went into receivership in November 1983. A number of the employees were made redundant but the receiver hoped to carry on with the remaining workforce until February. However, a major customer threatened to withdraw its custom unless the undertaking had been sold as a going concern by 24 November. Negotiations for a sale … Continue reading Secretary of State for Employment v Spence: CA 1986

Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal Ex Parte S: QBD 25 Feb 1998

Immigration Appeal Tribunal had duty to hear parties on a genuine appeal even though had failed to comply with earlier directions. Judges: Sullivan J Citations: Times 25-Feb-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 154 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances CA 1973 The claimant sought to bring his claim under … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal Ex Parte S: QBD 25 Feb 1998

Raymond Franks v Reuters Limited, First Resort Employment Limited: CA 10 Apr 2003

The appellant challenged the decision that he had not been an employee of the respondent. He had worked for them first through an agency, and come to be closer to them, but was still not paid sick pay. He complained that the tribunal had decided he was not an employee without first listening to the … Continue reading Raymond Franks v Reuters Limited, First Resort Employment Limited: CA 10 Apr 2003

Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v Knight (Contract of Employment): UTAA 9 May 2014

UTAA CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT The Claimant claimed from the Insolvency Service the redundancy payment which her company, of which she was the Managing Director and sole shareholder, had not paid to her. The Tribunal found that she was an employee of the company when it ceased trading, as insolvent. The Claimant had not been paid … Continue reading Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v Knight (Contract of Employment): UTAA 9 May 2014

Leisure Employment Services Ltd v Revenue and Customs: CA 16 Feb 2007

The company appealed a finding that it had been paying workers at less than the minimum hourly rate. Its workers resided at their places of work, and deductions were made toward the cost of providing accomodation etc. The company claimed that the charge for heating fell within its provision of accomodation. Held: It was a … Continue reading Leisure Employment Services Ltd v Revenue and Customs: CA 16 Feb 2007

PD, Regina (on the Application of) v West Midlands and North West Mental Health Review Tribunal: Admn 22 Oct 2003

The claimant was detained as a mental patient. He complained that a consultant employed by the NHS Trust which detained him, also sat on the panel of the tribunal which heard the review of his detention. Held: Such proceedings did engage the applicant’s right to a fair trial. The issue was whether a fair-minded and … Continue reading PD, Regina (on the Application of) v West Midlands and North West Mental Health Review Tribunal: Admn 22 Oct 2003

Gridquest Ltd T/A Select Employment, Piper Group Plc, XR Associates Ltd v K A Blackburn etc: CA 23 Jul 2002

The employer and employees disagreed about whether an element of holiday pay had been included in the rate of pay. Held: There had to be an explicit agreement between the parties before this could happen. It was not for one side unilaterally to impose its own understanding of the contract. The regulations referred to ‘contractual’ … Continue reading Gridquest Ltd T/A Select Employment, Piper Group Plc, XR Associates Ltd v K A Blackburn etc: CA 23 Jul 2002

Regina v London (North) Industrial Tribunal Ex Parte Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 13 May 1998

A tribunal had erred in ordering that names of both complainant and respondent and of witnesses should be protected in a sexual harassment case. The power only exists in respect of the complainant and a ‘person affected’. This group should not be extended. The imposition of general reporting restrictions on a sex discrimination case went … Continue reading Regina v London (North) Industrial Tribunal Ex Parte Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 13 May 1998

Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Antonissen: ECJ 26 Feb 1991

ECJ The free movement of workers enshrined in Article 48 of the Treaty entails the right for nationals of Member States to move freely within the territory of the other Member States and to stay there for the purposes of seeking employment. The period of time for which the person seeking employment may stay may … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Antonissen: ECJ 26 Feb 1991

Regina v Secretary of State For Employment Ex Parte Seymour-Smith and Another (No 2): HL 17 Feb 2000

Although fewer men were affected by the two year qualifying period before becoming entitled not to be dismissed unfairly, the difference was objectively justified by the need to encourage employers to take staff on, and was not directly derived from any discriminatory reason. It was not a breach of the Directive. Lord Nicholls said: ‘The … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State For Employment Ex Parte Seymour-Smith and Another (No 2): HL 17 Feb 2000

Regina v Secretary of State for Employment, ex parte Seymour Smith (1): HL 13 Mar 1997

The House referred to the European Court the question of whether the extension of the minimum period of employment before employment rights were acquired, was discriminatory. Citations: Times 14-Mar-1997, [1997] UKHL 11, [1997] 2 All ER 273, [1997] 1 WLR 473, [1997] ICR 371, [1997] IRLR 315 Links: House of Lords, Bailii Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Employment, ex parte Seymour Smith (1): HL 13 Mar 1997

University of Technology, Jamaica v Industrial Disputes Tribunaland Others: PC 17 Jul 2017

(Jamaica) The court was asked as to the Jamaican Industrial Disputes Tribunal, ‘can the IDT take into account matters of which the employer was unaware at the time of the dismissal and can it form its own judgment about whether, in the light of all the information available, the dismissal was justifiable? Or is it … Continue reading University of Technology, Jamaica v Industrial Disputes Tribunaland Others: PC 17 Jul 2017

Mann and others v Secretary of State for Employment: HL 8 Jul 1999

When acting effectively as a guarantor of a company’s obligations to its employees upon insolvency in paying unpaid wages, the Secretary of State for Employment was entitled to set off against those payments, payments made by way of compensation by administrative receivers by way of a protective award for employment entitlements. European Directives did not … Continue reading Mann and others v Secretary of State for Employment: HL 8 Jul 1999

Regina v London North Industrial Tribunal, ex parte Associated Newspapers Ltd: 1998

An Employment Tribunal considering applying the rule allowing a restriction on reporting a case, must have regard to the legislative purpose and also to the importance of the principles of freedom of the press and open justice. Judges: Keene J Citations: [1998] ICR 1212 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Tradition Securities and … Continue reading Regina v London North Industrial Tribunal, ex parte Associated Newspapers Ltd: 1998

Gridquest Ltd T/A Select Employment, Piper Group Plc, XR Associates Ltd v Blackburn etc: EAT 1 Nov 2000

The respondents appealed a finding that they were not due to make additional holiday pay under the regulations. The employer asserted that the hourly rate of pay included a rolled up element of holiday and sick pay. The employee asserted that the contract documentation made no mention of such an arrangement. The employers claimed that … Continue reading Gridquest Ltd T/A Select Employment, Piper Group Plc, XR Associates Ltd v Blackburn etc: EAT 1 Nov 2000

Ghiglieri v Systech Group Employees Ltd (Contract of Employment): EAT 7 Jun 2017

EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Implied term / variation / construction of term UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal The Employment Tribunal erred in holding that it was necessary in order for a term to be implied into an employee’s contract of employment as a result of custom and practice that it must be widely known … Continue reading Ghiglieri v Systech Group Employees Ltd (Contract of Employment): EAT 7 Jun 2017

ESS Support Services Llp v Pabani and Another (Contract of Employment): EAT 16 Dec 2015

CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Working outside the jurisdiction The Claimant is a British citizen and his home is in the United Kingdom. He was recruited in the United Kingdom pursuant to an offer letter dated 26 July 2011. It offered the position of Finance Director subject to receipt of satisfactory references and an … Continue reading ESS Support Services Llp v Pabani and Another (Contract of Employment): EAT 16 Dec 2015

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

Kapoor v Balfour Beatty Group Employment Ltd (Unfair Dismissal : Polkey Deduction): EAT 14 Mar 2016

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Polkey deduction The Claimant was dismissed by the Respondent and brought a claim for unfair dismissal. The Respondent accepted that the dismissal had been unfair because it had not followed its capability procedure. On the issue of compensation, it contended that – even if it had applied its capability procedure – … Continue reading Kapoor v Balfour Beatty Group Employment Ltd (Unfair Dismissal : Polkey Deduction): EAT 14 Mar 2016

Fenn (T/A Powercutz) v Schreeve (Jurisdictional Points: Continuity of Employment): EAT 2 Oct 2015

JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Claim in time and effective date of termination DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Direct disability discrimination PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs Equality Act 2010 limitation. No express finding by the Employment Tribunal on a late point raised by the Respondent below. However, it is plain that there was a ‘continuing act’ which rendered all … Continue reading Fenn (T/A Powercutz) v Schreeve (Jurisdictional Points: Continuity of Employment): EAT 2 Oct 2015

Seymour-Smith and Perez; Regina v Secretary of State for Employment, Ex Parte Seymour-Smith and Another: ECJ 9 Feb 1999

Awards made by an industrial tribunal for unfair dismissal are equivalent to pay for equal pay purposes. A system which produced a differential effect between sexes was not indirect discrimination unless the difference in treatment between men and women was substantial. Times 25-Feb-1999, C-167/97, [1999] IRLR 253, [1999] ICR 447, [1999] ECR I-623, [1999] EUECJ … Continue reading Seymour-Smith and Perez; Regina v Secretary of State for Employment, Ex Parte Seymour-Smith and Another: ECJ 9 Feb 1999

Joseph (T/A T-Zone) v Choughari and Another (Contract of Employment : Whether Established): EAT 3 Oct 2014

EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT Whether established Written particulars Joint and several liability. The respondents had each employed the claimant. The Employment Tribunal found that it was difficult to distinguish between the claimants who were associated employers. It therefore made liability to pay compensation joint and several, that is the whole amount could be enforced against … Continue reading Joseph (T/A T-Zone) v Choughari and Another (Contract of Employment : Whether Established): EAT 3 Oct 2014

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

Employment Rights Advice Ltd v Thew and Another (Practice and Procedure: Bias, Misconduct and Procedural Irregularity): EAT 20 Mar 2015

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity Procedural irregularity/fair hearing Allowing the appeal on this basis. On the Second Respondent’s application for wasted costs against the Appellant, the Employment Tribunal (‘ET’) hearing had ended with a lack of certainty as to how matters were to proceed in terms of evidence as to … Continue reading Employment Rights Advice Ltd v Thew and Another (Practice and Procedure: Bias, Misconduct and Procedural Irregularity): EAT 20 Mar 2015

GB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Employment and Support Allowance : Regulation 35): UTAA 23 Apr 2015

UTAA Employment and Support Allowance : Regulation 35 – The claimant’s appeal is allowed. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal dated 13 August 2013 is set aside and the case is remitted to a differently-constituted panel of the First-tier Tribunal to be re-decided. [2015] UKUT 200 (AAC) Bailii England and Wales Benefits Updated: 30 December … Continue reading GB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Employment and Support Allowance : Regulation 35): UTAA 23 Apr 2015

KB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Employment and Support Allowance : Regulation 35): UTAA 10 Apr 2015

Employment and Support Allowance : Regulation 35 – The appeal is allowed. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal sitting at Kidderminster on 15 January 2013 under reference SC053/12/05518 involved the making of an error on a point of law and is set aside. The case is referred to the First-tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) for … Continue reading KB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Employment and Support Allowance : Regulation 35): UTAA 10 Apr 2015

The Police and Crime Commissioner for Devon and Cornwall v Naldrett (Contract of Employment : Notice and Pay In Lieu): EAT 12 Feb 2015

EAT Contract of Employment : Notice and Pay In Lieu The Claimant was dismissed. He claimed in respect of unfair dismissal and lack of notice pay. The Employment Tribunal found his dismissal was fair. The Employment Tribunal recognised that the test for notice pay differed from unfair dismissal. It was required to decide if the … Continue reading The Police and Crime Commissioner for Devon and Cornwall v Naldrett (Contract of Employment : Notice and Pay In Lieu): EAT 12 Feb 2015

Unwin v Oltec Group Trading Ltd and Another (Contract of Employment : Implied Term/Variation/Construction of Term): EAT 13 Feb 2015

EAT Contract of Employment : Implied Term/Variation/Construction of Term – DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Burden of proof The Employment Tribunal had concluded that a contract of employment which stated that the Claimant was employed to work a minimum of 48 hours in fact meant a maximum of 48 hours. That finding was perverse: no one had … Continue reading Unwin v Oltec Group Trading Ltd and Another (Contract of Employment : Implied Term/Variation/Construction of Term): EAT 13 Feb 2015

KH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (ESA) (Employment and Support Allowance : Post 28311 Wca Activity 5: Manual Dexterity): UTAA 10 Oct 2014

UTAA Employment and Support Allowance : Post 28311 Wca Activity 5: Manual Dexterity Appeal with the permission of an Upper Tribunal Judge from a decision of the First-tier Tribunal. That decision dismissed the claimant’s appeal from a decision that the claimant’s existing award of incapacity credits and income support did not qualify for conversion into … Continue reading KH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (ESA) (Employment and Support Allowance : Post 28311 Wca Activity 5: Manual Dexterity): UTAA 10 Oct 2014

ILH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (ESA) (Employment and Support Allowance : Income-Related ESA): UTAA 21 Oct 2014

UTAA Employment and Support Allowance : Income-Related ESA – The claimant’s appeal is allowed. The decision of the First-tier Tribunal is set aside and, subject to there being any further issue as to the claimant’s financial position, there is substituted a decision that the claimant is entitled to employment and support allowance from 26 August … Continue reading ILH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (ESA) (Employment and Support Allowance : Income-Related ESA): UTAA 21 Oct 2014

Altes v University of Essex (Contract of Employment): EAT 2 Nov 2021

The employment tribunal did not err in law in holding that the terms of the claimant’s contract of employment (including incorporated provisions of the respondent’s Ordinances) allowed the respondent to terminate her contract before the end of her probationary period because of unsatisfactory performance, without following the procedure for dismissal for good cause pursuant to … Continue reading Altes v University of Essex (Contract of Employment): EAT 2 Nov 2021

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

Bannerman v Euroscot Engineering Ltd (Contract of Employment : Employee, Worker or Self Employed): EAT 19 Aug 2020

In this case the Tribunal held that the Claimant was not the employee of the Respondent. It considered that while the tests in Ready Mix Concrete (South East) Limited v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance [1968] 2 QB 497 were largely satisfied the Respondent did not possess a sufficient degree of control over the … Continue reading Bannerman v Euroscot Engineering Ltd (Contract of Employment : Employee, Worker or Self Employed): EAT 19 Aug 2020

Warner v Armfield Retail and Leisure Ltd (Contract of Employment : Frustration): EAT 8 Oct 2013

EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Frustration DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability related discrimination For the purposes of claims of unfair dismissal and breach of contract the Respondent argued, and the Employment Tribunal accepted, that the Claimant’s contract came to an end by virtue of the doctrine of frustration. It was argued that this doctrine had no … Continue reading Warner v Armfield Retail and Leisure Ltd (Contract of Employment : Frustration): EAT 8 Oct 2013

Sood Enterprises Ltd v Healy (Contract of Employment : Sick Pay and Holiday Pay): EAT 14 Mar 2013

EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Sick pay and holiday payWorking Time Directive 2003/88/EC Article 7; Working Time Regulations: holiday pay accrued when on sick leave. The Claimant sought payment in lieu of holiday pay, under WTR 13 and 13A, which he claimed had accrued during a period of illness prior to his resigning from his … Continue reading Sood Enterprises Ltd v Healy (Contract of Employment : Sick Pay and Holiday Pay): EAT 14 Mar 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

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

Cart v The Upper Tribunal: SC 21 Jun 2011

Limitations to Judicial Reviw of Upper Tribunal Three claimants sought to challenge decisions of various Upper Tribunals by way of judicial review. In each case the request for judicial review had been first refused on the basis that having been explicitly designated as higher courts, the proper scope of judicial review was limited or excluded. … Continue reading Cart v The Upper Tribunal: SC 21 Jun 2011

Sheikh v Independent Tribunal Service: EAT 16 Mar 2004

Part-time chairmen of social security tribunals were office holders rather than employees and were not Crown employees. Peter Clark J Unreported, 16 March 2004 Cited by: Cited – O’Brien v Department for Constitutional Affairs CA 19-Dec-2008 The claimant was a part time recorder. He claimed to be entitled to a judicial pension. Held: The Employment … Continue reading Sheikh v Independent Tribunal Service: EAT 16 Mar 2004

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

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

Regina v Secretary of State Employment, ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission and Another: HL 4 Mar 1994

The Equal Opportunities Commission sought judicial review to test whether English employment law was in breach of EC law where threshold conditionsions for part time workers to make unfair dismissal and redundancy law claims were discriminatory. Held: The different employment rights for part timers were a form of indirect discrimination because they affected women more … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State Employment, ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission and Another: HL 4 Mar 1994

Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College for Education and Employment: ECJ 13 Jan 2004

ECJ Principle of equal pay for men and women – Direct effect – Meaning of worker – Self-employed female lecturer undertaking work presumed to be of equal value to that which is undertaken in the same college by male lecturers who are employees, but under contract with a third company – Self-employed lecturers not eligible … Continue reading Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College for Education and Employment: ECJ 13 Jan 2004