The employers had sought to appeal from a decision of the employment tribunal. The EAT had refused it as out of time. Held: The rules required the appellant to file within 42 days of receiving the decision, the notice of appeal together with a copy of the tribunal’s written reasons. ‘Sent’ meant the date on … Continue reading Gdynia American Shipping Lines (London) Ltd v Chelminski: CA 8 Jul 2004
This appeal concerns the directly effective right of police officers under EU law to have the principle of equal treatment applied to them. The question raised is whether the enforcement of that right by means of proceedings in the Employment Tribunal is barred by the principle of judicial immunity, where the allegedly discriminatory conduct is … Continue reading P v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: SC 25 Oct 2017
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Preliminary issuesJURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Claim in time and effective date of terminationEmployment Tribunal declared that it had jurisdiction to consider a claim for unfair dismissal, rejecting arguments that time grounds excluded it. On review, it upheld this decision. A decision was made under rule 28 ET Procedure Rules. A subsequent … Continue reading Kudjodji v Lidl Ltd: EAT 25 May 2011
Acting on guidance, the parties representatives and the tribunal had assumed that part of the award relating to loss of future earnings would not be taxable. The question now was whether the tribunal had power of its own motion to review its decision. Held: ‘There is a difference between saying that a case to which … Continue reading Williams v Ferrosan Ltd: EAT 5 Mar 2004
Compensation for non-economic loss brought about by the manner of an unfair dismissal is, on authority and on principle, recoverable. The award of such compensation by the employment tribunal in the present case was not excessive and was adequately explained. The court could look to parliamentary reports to identify the mischief sought to be rectified, … Continue reading Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council: CA 11 Feb 2004
Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, and that jurisdiction was not created by minimal presence here. Held: The provisions as to jurisdiction … Continue reading Saggar v Ministry of Defence: EAT 25 May 2004
The applicant had been employed to provide services to RAF in the Ascension Islands. He alleged constructive dismissal. There was an issue as to whether somebody working in the Ascension Islands was protected by the 1996 Act. The restriction on jurisdiction in s196 had been removed. The question now was as to what test applied … Continue reading Serco Ltd v Lawson and Foreign and Commonwealth Office: CA 23 Jan 2004
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
EAT Practice and Procedure – Time for appealing Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P) Citations: PA/207/03, [2003] EAT 0207 – 03 – 2506, [2003] UKEAT 0207 – 03 – 2506, [2004] ICR 55, [2004] IRLR 185 Links: Bailii, Bailii, EATn Citing: Cited – Mock v Inland Revenue EAT 1-Mar-1999 In the context of the … Continue reading Sian v Abbey National Plc: EAT 25 Jun 2003
The claimants sought a declaration that part of the Regulations were invalid, and an infringement of their human rights. The Regulations sought to exempt church schools from an obligation not to discriminate against homosexual teachers. Held: The Regulation was within the scope of the Directive. Though a member state had some freedom in implementing a … Continue reading Regina (Amicus etc) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: Admn 26 Apr 2004
The applicant had soft tissue injuries around the spine as a consequence of a back injury at work. He was absent from work for a long time as a result of his injuries, and he was eventually dismissed when his medical advisers could provide no clear idea of when it would be possible for him … Continue reading Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999
EAT Practice and Procedure : Costs – Employment Tribunal refusal to make an award of costs – ET Rules 2004 When deciding it would not be appropriate to make an award of costs (having determined that the threshold for such an award had otherwise been crossed) did the Employment Judge err in taking into account: … Continue reading Mardner v Gardner and Another: EAT 25 Jul 2014
EAT Employment Tribunal claim brought out of time because of Solicitor’s negligent advice. Application of British Coal Corporation -v- Keeble [1999] IRLR 337. His Hon Judge Mcmullen QC UKEAT/0851/03, [2004] UKEAT 0851 – 03 – 0704 Bailii, EATn England and Wales Citing: Cited – British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others EAT 26-Mar-1997 The employer … Continue reading Chohan v Derby Law Centre: EAT 2 Mar 2004
EAT Appeal from ET’s decision, at directions hearing, permitting evidence to be adduced, at the forthcoming hearing of a direct sex discrimination and victimisation complaint, of the Applicant’s allegation that, at a meeting expressed to be ‘without prejudice’, her employers sought to terminate her employment following a grievance raised by her about her treatment on … Continue reading BNP Paribas v A Mezzotero: EAT 30 Mar 2004
The defendant company appealed against an order re-instating the claimants’ claims for damages for race discrimination and victimisation after they had been struck out for wilful disobedience of the tribunal’s orders. Held: When making a strike-out order, there were two cardinal conditions at least one of which must be met. Either the unreasonable conduct has … Continue reading Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James: CA 25 May 2006
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy. Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law because it is the antithesis of fairness. It brings the law … Continue reading Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004
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
Age UK challenged the implementation by the UK of the Directive insofar as it established a default retirement age (DRA) at 65. Held: The claim failed. The decision to adopt a DRA was not a disproportionate way of giving effect to the social aim of labour market confidence. The use of a designated retirement age … Continue reading Age UK, Regina (On the Application of) v Attorney General: Admn 25 Sep 2009
The company made redundancies but failed to carry out any effective or honest consultation. The tribunal awarded the maximum 90 days protective order. The company appealed saying that it had given the employees greater notice than was strictly due. Held: The purpose of the order was punitive and therefore was not affected by the actual … Continue reading Susie Radin Ltd v GMB and others: CA 20 Feb 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
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004
EAT Contract of Employment – Damages for breach of contract – The Tribunal Chairman erred in law in concluding that Mrs Verdin’s breach of contract claim should be dismissed.Rule 25 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2004 is to be construed in the light of Ako v Rothschild Asset Management [2002] IRLR 348.A claim should be … Continue reading Verdin v Harrods Ltd: EAT 21 Dec 2005
To receive a compensatory award, a claimant must provide proof of loss. Referring to Norton Tool, Lord Blofeld said: ‘The approach . . has, as we understand the position, governed the attitude of tribunals to compensation ever since. It is, in our view, inconsistent with that approach to introduce principles of foreseeability or remoteness in … Continue reading Leonard v Strathclyde Buses Ltd: 1998
EAT Practice and Procedure : Imposition of Deposit – Employment Tribunal ordered that Claimant pay a deposit of andpound;250 as a condition of being permitted to continue to take part in proceedings relating to his claim that he was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against on grounds of age.Appeal dismissed.(1) Rule 18(2) of Schedule 1 to … Continue reading Spring v First Capital East Ltd: EAT 20 Jul 2012
The applicants sought to strike out a claim under section 459. The two companies sold toiletries, the one as retail agent for the other. They disputed the relationship of the companies, and the use of a trading name. Documents were disclosed which appeared to be fabrications. Held: Where a party was in breach of court … Continue reading Arrow Nominees Inc, Blackledge v Blackledge: ChD 2 Nov 1999
Parties to litigation had made without prejudice disclosures. One party sought to give evidence contradicting the dsclosure, and the other now applied for leave to amend based upon the without prejudice statements to be admitted to demonstrate the perjury. Held: The court had to balance the competing needs of fairness and expedition. There was nothing … Continue reading Savings and Investment Bank Ltd (In Liquidation) v Fincken: CA 14 Nov 2003
The claimant challenged a decision of the chairman of the Employment tribunal not to recuse himself on a later hearing after the claimant had previously made allegations of bias and improper conduct against him. Judges: Waller LJ, Laws LJ, Leveson LJ Citations: [2006] EWCA Civ 1462, [2007] IRLR 211, [2006] ICR 1565 Links: Bailii Statutes: … Continue reading Ansar v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc and others: CA 9 Oct 2006
EAT Deposit ordered. Order lost in post due to the Claimant putting wrong post-code on ET1. Review. Distinguishing Judgments from Orders. Strike-out. Extending time. Judges: His Honour Peter Clark Citations: [2005] UKEAT 0318 – 05 – 2907, UKEAT/0319/05/TM, UKEAT/0318/05/TM, [2005] ICR 1647, UKEAT/0320/05/TM, [2005] IRLR 836 Links: Bailii, EATn Statutes: Employment Tribunal Rules 2004 20(1) … Continue reading Sodexho Ltd v Gibbons: EAT 14 Jul 2005
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reason for dismissal including substantial other reasonThe Employment Tribunal failed to give adequate reasons for decisions that(a) There was a redundancy situation that led to the dismissal of the Claimant.(b) There had been, or was expected to be any diminution or cessation in the kind of work undertaken by the Claimant.(c) … Continue reading Macquet v Naiade Resorts (UK) Ltd: EAT 16 Jun 2011
UTIAC LAW(A) There is nothing in MS (Palestinian Territories) [2010] UKSC 25 that overrules the judgments in MA (Ethiopia) [2009] EWCA Civ 289. Where a claim to recognition as a refugee depends on whether a person is being arbitrarily denied the right of return to a country as one of its nationals, that issue must … Continue reading ST (Ethnic Eritrean – Nationality – Return) Ethiopia CG: UTIAC 1 Jul 2011
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-BarkeAlthough this was a ‘narrative’ judgment sufficient substance could be extracted from the decision to demonstrate compliance with rule 30(6) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 SI No. 1861; Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd v Wilcox [2006] EWCA Civ 1240, [2007] IRLR 63, Greenwood … Continue reading Sivagnansundarum v Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust: EAT 28 Jun 2011
The claimant, Mr Tellerup, was employed as a restaurant manager by the transferor, Irma Catering A/S. When its lease was terminated it dismissed all staff. Mr Tellerup’s statutory period of notice expired on 30 April 1983. But it continued to run the business with the same staff until 25 February 1983, from when a new … Continue reading Foreningen Af Arbejdsledere I Danmark v Daddy’s Dance Hall A/S: ECJ 10 Feb 1988
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Compensation The decisions to apportion compensation, not to award any future loss after April 2008 and to apply an ‘uplift’ of 25% in respect of breach of statutory procedures were neither irrational, nor without evidential foundation nor based on any misdirection and the appeal would be dismissed. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – … Continue reading Joes v The City and County of Swansea: EAT 5 May 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
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
The claimants were airline pilots employed by the respondent company with headquarters in Hong Kong. The court was asked whether an English Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear their complaints of unfair dismissal. Held: The pilots were employed in England so as to allow a claim for unfair dismissal here. Judges: Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, … Continue reading Crofts and others v Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and others: CA 19 May 2005
UBS AG devised an employee bonus scheme to take advantage of the provisions of Chapter 2 of the 2003 Act, with the sole purpose other than tax avoidance, and such consequential advantages as would flow from tax avoidance. Several pre-ordained steps were taken according to a detailed timetable. Once the structure of the scheme had … Continue reading UBS Ag and Another v Revenue and Customs: SC 9 Mar 2016
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
An employer’s liability for racial abuse by its employees is wider than its liability under the rules of vicarious liability. The statute created new obligations. Sex and race discrimination legislation seeks to eradicate the ‘very great evil’ of discrimination.Waite LJ said: ‘a statute is to be construed according to its legislative purpose, with due regard … Continue reading Tower Boot Company Limited v Jones: CA 11 Dec 1996
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
EAT The company decided to close two branches and make redundancies. They presented the closure itself as a fait accompli to the union representatives. The Tribunal found that this involved a failure to consult about ways of avoiding redundancies because the decision to close had been determined prior to any meeting with the union. Held: … Continue reading Securicor Omega Express Ltd v GMB (A Trade Union): EAT 7 Apr 2003
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Costs Costs – whether a party can recover by way of costs counsel’s fees (yes) and those of a non legally qualified adviser, as defined in s.71 CandLSA 1990 (no). Employment Tribunal Rules 38, 40-42 considered. Whether VAT recoverable by way of costs; point not taken below (Kumchyk). Whether claim misconceived … Continue reading Ramsay and others v Bowercross Construction Ltd and Another: EAT 14 Aug 2008
Lord Esher MR said: ‘It could not be denied that the court had jurisdiction to grant an interim injunction before trial. It was, however, a most delicate jurisdiction to exercise, because, though Fox’s Act only applied to indictments and informations for libel, the practice under that Act had been followed in civil actions for libel, … Continue reading William Coulson and Sons v James Coulson and Co: CA 1887
EAT The Appellant was found by the Tribunal to have been victimised and discriminated against in three respects; in two cases at the hands of Mr Williams who commenced disciplinary proceedings against him and in one case by the giving of a warning as the outcome of those proceedings by a panel chaired by Dr … Continue reading Henry v London Metropolitan University: EAT 19 Sep 2006
Does an Employment Tribunal have jurisdiction to set aside a notice of withdrawal of a claim given under rule 25(2) of the 2004 Regulations? Held: Once a notice of withdrawal of a claim was served the employment tribunals had no jurisdiction to set it aside. The rules were lamentably drafted, but the decision was correct. … Continue reading Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust: CA 27 Jul 2006
The claimant had been dismissed shortly after becoming unable to work. She sought payment of her normal salary during the period of notice saying this was established good practice. Held: ‘We are put in the invidious position of being bound by a Court of Appeal decision which seems to the majority to conflict with a … Continue reading Langley and Another v Burso: EAT 3 Mar 2006
The claimant had dual Irish and US nationality. He therefore also was a citizen of the EU. He complained that the British rules against payment of job seekers’ allowance were discriminatory. The matter had already been to the ECJ. Held: The residence test as applied was not in contravention of EU law. ‘[T]he proper interpretation … Continue reading Collins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 4 Apr 2006
EAT Rule 25 of The Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2004 (i) Does an employment tribunal have jurisdiction to set aside a notice of withdrawal of a claim given under Rule 25(2) of The Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2004? Held, that it does not. (ii) Was the Chairman’s decision to order the claimant to … Continue reading Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust: EAT 20 Jan 2006
EAT Transfer of Undertakings: Consultation and Other Information; Transfer Practice and Procedure: Appellate Jurisdiction Nature of ‘undertaking’ for the purposes of TUPE: could there be a stable economic entity arising out of work done under contract where the contract could be terminated at will or others brought in to do the work in substitution? Could … Continue reading Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd Interserve Industrial Services Ltd v C Wilcox and 6 others A Seymour and 18 others I M Realisation Ltd (In Administration): EAT 2 Nov 2005
EAT Practice and Procedure: Review -and- Withdrawal Claim treated as withdrawn under Employment Tribunal Rules 25(3). Misapplication of law on facts. Review application similarly dismissed. Review judgment set aside; case allowed to proceed before Employment Tribunal. Judges: His Honour Judge Peter Clark Citations: UKEAT/0483/05, [2005] UKEAT 0483 – 05 – 1310 Links: Bailii, EAT Citing: … Continue reading Tamborrino v Kuypers: EAT 13 Oct 2005
The employee first issued a claim in the employment tribunal, and then in the High Court. The defendant company argued that the tribunal proceedings were not concluded before the High Court proceedings were issued, but only later when they were struck out. The employee said she had withdrawn them. Held: The withdrawal of tribunal proceedings … Continue reading London Borough of Enfield v Sivanandan: CA 20 Jan 2005
In the context of the time for appealing to the EAT under Rule 3(3) EAT Rules 1993, as amended, ‘sent’ referred to the date appearing on the ET ‘decision’.Morison P said: ‘Industrial Tribunal chairmen are required to produce reasons. When reduced to writing, it is the responsibility of the clerk to transmit those reasons to … Continue reading Mock v Inland Revenue: EAT 1 Mar 1999
EAT The EAT considered the consequences, of a decision to strike out a Notice of Appearance under Rule 15(2)(d). Held: The EAT will require an employment tribunal, among other things, to consider the proportionality of what it was doing. If a fair trial were not possible on liability, there could still be an order simply … Continue reading Bolch v Chipman: EAT 19 May 2003
(National Industrial Relations Court) The court was asked to calculate damages on a dismissal, and particularly as to whether the manner of the dismissal should affect the damages. Held: The common law rules and authorities on wrongful dismissal are irrelevant. That cause of action is quite unaffected by the Act which has created an entirely … Continue reading Norton Tool Co Ltd v Tewson: NIRC 30 Oct 1972
The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of andpound;25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed. Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment tribunal decision. It did not look to see whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal had erred … Continue reading Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2): CA 20 Dec 2002
The claimant appealed against an order striking out her claim. Held: The right to respect for private life is qualified by the right for both parties to have a just trial of the issues between them; and it has to be borne in mind that it was the claimant who invoked the right to such … Continue reading De Keyser Limited v Wilson: EAT 20 Mar 2001
ADI appealed against a decision that, when they took over a services contract, there had been a transfer within the Regulations. Held: Though no assets tangible or otherwise, had been transferred, this was a contract to provide services at a location and in circumstances, and the EAT found an economic entity. The state of the … Continue reading ADI (UK) Limited v Firm Security Group Limited: CA 22 Jun 2001
The court gave detailed guidance on the application of the new procedures on civil appeals in private law cases introduced on May 2. Appeals from a County Court District Judge’s final decision in a multi-track case could now go straight to the Court of Appeal. Appeals will generally be subject to leave being obtained. An … Continue reading Tanfern Ltd v Cameron-MacDonald, Cameron-MacDonald: CA 12 May 2000
EAT Practice and Procedure – Striking out/dismissal; Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity Striking out after 50 days of hearing spread over three years. The Appellant deliberately refused to attend hearings, requesting a fresh Tribunal hear his case. Tribunal correct to strike out claim. Appellant had conducted a lengthy campaign to force the Tribunal Chairman to … Continue reading Khan v Kirklees Metropolitan Council, Hull, etc: EAT 13 Feb 2007
EAT Practice and Procedure Statutory dispute resolution procedures introduced by the Employment Act 2002 – modified grievance procedure – whether employee complied with requirement to set out in writing the basis for the grievance. Held, allowing the appeal, that the employee had not done so. Judges: His Honour Judge Richardson Citations: UKEAT/0391/06 Links: EATn Statutes: … Continue reading City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council v Pratt: EAT 4 Oct 2006
The claimants said that they had been tortured by Saudi police when arrested on false charges. They sought damages, and appealed against an order denying jurisdiction over the defendants. They said that the allegation of torture allowed an exception to state immunity. Held: The Kingdom’s appeal succeeded. The protection of state immunity was essentially a … Continue reading Jones v Ministry of Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others: HL 14 Jun 2006
Where an Industrial Tribunal’s decision could not be reviewed because under the rules, the new evidence had been available, a review based on the new evidence should only be granted where there existed some mitigation causing the failure to bring the matter within the rules, rather than the nature of the dispute at large, making … Continue reading General Council of British Shipping v Deria and Others: 1985
EAT Practice and Procedure – Withdrawal. Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Rimer Citations: UKEAT/0581/05 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: See Also – Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust EAT 20-Jan-2006 EAT Rule 25 of The Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2004 (i) Does an employment tribunal have jurisdiction to set aside a … Continue reading Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust: EAT 9 Dec 2005
Statute’s Mischief May be Inspected The House considered limitations upon them in reading statements made in the Houses of Parliament when construing a statute. Held: It is rare that a statute can be properly interpreted without knowing the legislative object. The courts may look outside a statute in order to identify the ‘mischief’ Parliament was … Continue reading Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG: HL 5 Mar 1975
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
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable harm for the purposes of an action of damages for personal injury. Held: The insurers’ appeals failed. … Continue reading AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011
The respondent’s child lived with the estranged father for most of each week. She was obliged to contribute child support. She now lived with a woman, and complained that because her relationship was homosexual, she had been asked to pay more than someone in a heterosexual relationship. Held: The claim failed. The regulations had now … Continue reading Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v M: HL 8 Mar 2006
The claimant, a charity assisting immigrants and asylum seekers, challenged a policy document regulating the access to the court of failed applicants facing removal. They said that the new policy, reducing the opportunity to appeal to 72 hours or less, made ineffective any right for judicial review. Held: The request was granted, and the 2010 … Continue reading Medical Justice, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 26 Jul 2010
EAT Practice and Procedure – CompromiseEqual Pay Act – Work rated equivalent; Damages/Compensation This case raises three issues, two of which are of particular significance in the field of equal pay.Do employees whose jobs are rated as equivalent under a job evaluation scheme have the right to seek compensation going back up to six years … Continue reading Bainbridge and others v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council: EAT 23 Mar 2007
EAT Practice and Procedure: Appellate Jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke – UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal Reasons The simplification of the wording of the Rule relating to the content of the Reasons (i.e. the change from Rule 30(6) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 to Rule 62(5) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules … Continue reading Vairea v Reed Business Information Ltd: EAT 3 Jun 2016
EAT Practice and Procedure : Amendment – Amendment of an ET claim to add a new cause of action – ACAS Early Conciliation (Section 18A Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (as amended)) At a Preliminary Hearing, the Claimant applied to amend to add a new claim (victimisation), which post-dated the ET1. The Respondent objected solely on … Continue reading Science Warehouse Ltd v Mills: EAT 9 Oct 2015
A transfer of a contract to provide business services, without the transfer of significant assets was not a transfer of an undertaking within the Directive. Nevertheless the transfer of tangible assets was only one factor among several. Times 26-Mar-1997, C-13/95, [1997] IRLR 255, [1997] EUECJ C-13/95, [1997] ICR 662 Bailii Council Directive 77/187/EEC European Cited … Continue reading Suzen v Zehnacker Gebaudereinigung Krankenhausservice (Judgment): ECJ 11 Mar 1997
The applicant was a chief inspector of police. She had been prevented from carrying out appraisals of other senior staff, and complained of sex discrimination. Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The tribunal had taken a two stage approach. It had asked first whether there had been less favourable treatment, and then asked why there had … Continue reading Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary: HL 27 Feb 2003
The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes. The bank sought to have the direction given under section 7 of the 2008 Act. … Continue reading Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2): SC 19 Jun 2013
EAT Practice and Procedure: Review – Compromise By the first of two appeals, the Claimant appealed against the decision of a Regional Employment Judge to reject at the preliminary consideration stage his application for a review of a decision of a different Judge to reject his claim for interim relief on the ground that he … Continue reading Benney v Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs: EAT 6 Feb 2015
EAT Practice and Procedure : Striking-Out/Dismissal – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity The Employment Judge made a determination of time limit issues and struck out Further and Better Particulars at a Case Management Discussion. He should not have done so: see rule 17(2) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2004 then applicable. He should … Continue reading Bham v 2Gether NHS Foundation Trust Gloucestershire: EAT 12 Sep 2014
EAT Practice and Procedure : Costs – Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 Schedule 1 Rule 40(2) and (3) Simply because the Employment Tribunal’s costs jurisdiction was engaged, costs did not follow the event: the Tribunal still needed to be satisfied that it would be appropriate to make an award of costs, … Continue reading Ayoola v St Christopher’s Fellowship: EAT 6 Jun 2014
The employee had failed to mention at the hearing of his claim for a redundancy payment a fact which was arguably highly material to the issue of whether his refusal of alternative employment was reasonable; and his claim had been dismissed. He applied for a review. Held: The court was asked whether, and in what … Continue reading Flint v Eastern Electricity Board: EAT 1975
A company went into liquidation, being owed substantial sums by another company in the same group, but itself insolvent. A settlement did not include accrued interest, but was claimed to be taxed as if it had, and on an accruals basis. If so, was this an expense properly arising in the insolvency, and payable as … Continue reading Kahn and Another v Commissioners of Inland Revenue; In re Toshoku Finance plc: HL 20 Feb 2002
Mr Lawson was employed by Serco as a security supervisor at the British RAF base on Ascension Island, which is a dependency of the British Overseas Territory of St Helena. Mr Botham was employed as a youth worker at various Ministry of Defence establishments in Germany; under the NATO Status of Forces Agreement of 1951 … Continue reading Serco Ltd v Lawson; Botham v Ministry of Defence; Crofts and others v Veta Limited: HL 26 Jan 2006
EAT Practice and Procedure : Application for review of judgment in default Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 ET1 sent to Respondent by Employment Tribunal but not received. Application for review initially failing to comply with requirements of r.33(2) ET Rules 2004. Later application/amendment of original application in correct form. Application still … Continue reading Camden Federation of Tenants and Residents Association v Hayward: EAT 28 Feb 2014
A petition had been lodged alleging unfair prejudice in the conduct of the company’s affairs. The defendants alleged that when applying for relief under section 459, the claimants had attempted to pervert the course of justice by producing forged or falsified documentation in discovery. The forgery was admitted. Held: If a party to litigation behaved … Continue reading Arrow Nominees Inc and Another v Blackledge and Others: CA 22 Jun 2000
moroak_cromieEAT2005 EAT Response lodged at the Employment Tribunal 44 minutes late and the Employment Tribunal ordered that the Respondent could take no part in the proceedings and refused to review that order on the basis it had no jurisdiction to do so. The Employment Tribunal has no power under Rule 4 to entertain an application … Continue reading Moroak T/A Blake Envelopes v Cromie: EAT 19 Apr 2005
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right to a fair trial. The right not to give evidence … Continue reading Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown: PC 5 Dec 2000
The claimant’s case had been struck out after non-compliance with an order to file further particulars. His appeal was allowed by the EAT, and the School now itself appealed, saying that the employment judge had wrongly had felt obliged to have regard to the Civil Procedure Rules on striking cases out. Held: The school’s appeal … Continue reading St Albans Girls School and Another v Neary: CA 12 Nov 2009
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
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
Iniquity surpasses legal advice privilege PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disclosure PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal An Employment Judge struck out paragraphs of the Claimant’s claim as they depended on an email in respect of which legal advice privilege was claimed. In considering whether privilege could not be claimed as the advice in the email was … Continue reading X v Y Ltd (Practice and Procedure – Disclosure): EAT 9 Aug 2018
Misfeasance in Public Office – Recklessness The bank sought to strike out the claim alleging misfeasance in public office in having failed to regulate the failed bank, BCCI. Held: Misfeasance in public office might occur not only when a company officer acted to injure a party, but also where he acted with knowledge of, or … Continue reading Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England (No 3): HL 22 Mar 2001
The respondent bus driver had claimed unfair dismissal following an accident. The Employment Tribunal struck out his case as having no reasonable prospect of success, but the case had been re-instated by the EAT. Held: the power given in the rules to strike out a case was draconian and to be used in exceptional cases … Continue reading Tayside Public Transportcompany Ltd (T/A Travel Dundee) v Reilly: SCS 30 May 2012
The claimant’s husband had been lost from the defendant’s ship at sea. The defendant had contracted to pay compensation unless the loss was by suicide. They so determined. The court was now asked whether that was a permissible conclusion in the circumstances: ‘This case raises two inter-linked questions of principle, one general and one particular. … Continue reading Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd: SC 18 Mar 2015
Conditions for new evidence on appeal At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for a retrial. Held: The Court of Appeal refused to … Continue reading Ladd v Marshall: CA 29 Nov 1954
The administrators gave employees of the company notice of termination of their employment. Then administrators refused consent under para 43(6) to actions against the company in the Northern Ireland Industrial Tribunal for protective awards, unfair dismissal, breach of contract and otherwise. The claims were issued anyway, and the administrators argued that they were a nullity, … Continue reading McCartney and Unite The Union and Another v Nortel Networks UK Ltd (In Administration): ChD 22 Apr 2010
The defendant hospital had custody of sperm samples given by the claimants in the course of fertility treatment. The samples were effectively destroyed when the fridge malfunctioned. Each claimant was undergoing chemotherapy which would prevent them providing future samples. They appealed a finding that they they had no losses, based on the suggestion that the … Continue reading Yearworth and others v North Bristol NHS Trust: CA 4 Feb 2009
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside. Held: Investors having once assigned their causes of action to the ICS, could not later … Continue reading Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society: HL 19 Jun 1997
Allowance of Stigma Damages The employees claimed damages, saying that the way in which their employer had behaved during their employment had led to continuing losses, ‘stigma damages’ after the termination. Held: It is an implied term of any contract of employment that the employer shall not without reasonable and proper cause conduct itself in … Continue reading Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International: HL 12 Jun 1997
Guidance for Wasted Costs Orders Guidance was given on the circumstances required for the making of wasted costs orders against legal advisers. A judge invited to make an order arising out of an advocate’s conduct of court proceedings must make full allowance for the fact that an advocate has to make decisions quickly and under … Continue reading Ridehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd: CA 26 Jan 1994
Deleayed Rates Claims Service made them Defective The council claimed that the defendants were liable for business rates. The defendants said that the notices were defective in not having been served ‘as soon as practicable’, and further that they should not be enforced since the delay had created substantial prejudice. The Council challenged the correctness … Continue reading North Somerset District Council v Honda Motor Europe Ltd and Others: QBD 2 Jul 2010
Challenge to the lawfulness of the practice of the EAT in referring back to the IT deficient reasons with an invitation to expand upon them. Held: The words ‘disposing of’ in the section meant ‘dealing with conclusively’ rather than ‘regulating’. However the procedure set down in Burns was to be followed. Nothing in the rules … Continue reading Barke v Seetec Business Technology Centre Ltd: CA 16 May 2005
In 2000 the claimant succeeded in his claim for discrimination, but had not pursued his remedy. He now appealed against a refusal to allow him to take it further. He had initially failed to pursue the matter for ill health. He later refused to submit to an examination by the defendant’s medical experts. Held: Whilst … Continue reading Abegaze v Shrewsbury College of Arts and Technology: CA 20 Feb 2009
