The defendants proposed to engage in strike action in relation to proposed arrangements for working in Boxing Day. The employer said that the ballot had not been conducted as required. Citations: [2011] EWHC 3506 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450162
Citations: [2011] EWHC 7 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.428048
The Union complained that it had not been allowed to expel from its membership a member of the far right BNP party. They said that his views were incompatible with the union’s stated objectives. There was no related closed shop. Held: The provisions were an interference with the Union’s right of free association, and the … Continue reading Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen (Aslef) v The United Kingdom: ECHR 27 Feb 2007
‘GTR, a train operating company, applies for an interim injunction to restrain ASLEF, the train drivers’ union, from inducing train drivers who are employed by GTR on the Gatwick Express and Southern Services to breach their contracts of employment by taking part in industrial action consisting of strike action or action short of a strike.’ … Continue reading Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd v The Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen: QBD 2 Jun 2016
The reason adduced by the union for the dismissal of the climant was found by the Tribunal on the facts not to be the true reason for dismissal, the true reason being the union executive committee’s political antipathy to Mr Brady. Held: It was highly arguable that a finding that disciplinary proceedings had been commenced … Continue reading Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen v Brady: EAT 31 Mar 2006
EAT Contract within s174(4)(a)(iii) of TULRA 1992 for which a Trade Union cannot expel a member is limited to being or ceasing to be a member of a political party (in this case BNP). A union can expel a member if its reason is exclusively his or her activities as a party member and not … Continue reading Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen v Lee: EAT 23 Feb 2004
Elias , Lewison , Lloyd Jones LJJ [2016] EWCA Civ 1309, [2016] WLR(D) 688 Bailii, WLRD England and Wales Employment, European Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572738
Application by rail operator to restrain the defendant union from encouraging its members not to operae driver-only tains. Held: There was an arguable case, and the balance of convenience lay in granting the order. Langstaff J [2016] EWHC 985 (QB) Bailii Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 England and Wales Employment, Torts – … Continue reading Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd v The Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen: QBD 22 Apr 2016
Only in exceptional cases will different treatment of employees of itself amount to an unfairness. Citations: [1995] IRLR 305 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – East Surrey District Health Authority v Paul EAT 4-May-1993 . . Cited by: Cited – Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen v Brady EAT 31-Mar-2006 The reason … Continue reading Paul v East Surrey District Health Authority: CA 1995
Citations: [2009] EWCA Civ 450 Links: Bailii Statutes:
These appeals raise questions of some general interest to Fire Brigades and those whom they employ, affecting as they do pension and other rights under the statutory pension scheme for firemen Citations: [2000] EWCA Civ 3034, [2001] OPLR 85 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Financial Services, Employment Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.330962
EAT Redundancy : Suitable Alternative Employment – Did the Employment Tribunal err in law in concluding that the Appellant had unreasonably refused an offer of alternative employment for her own reasons, when it had correctly concluded that the offer was an offer of suitable employment which a reasonable employee could have accepted? Judges: Wilkie J … Continue reading Readman v Devon Primary Care Trust: EAT 1 Dec 2011
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Automatically unfair reasons Public Interest Disclosure Section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 inadmissible reason for dismissal – burden of proof – whether Protected Disclosures – case remitted to same Employment Tribunal for further consideration. Judges: His Honour Judge Clark Citations: [2007] UKEAT 0516 – 06 – 0203, UKEAT/0516/06, [2007] … Continue reading Dr Kuzel v Roche Products Ltd: EAT 2 Mar 2007
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 plaintiff fireman was injured attending a fire. He sought damages from the owner whose negligence had caused it. The court at first instance (Nash J) found the land owner negligent but not liable to the plaintiff on the ground that the injuries he sustained were not a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s negligence. … Continue reading Ogwo v Taylor: CA 1987
The defendants, father and son, operated a firework storage facility. Two fire service employees died when a fire was fought. They were thought to have been storing Type 1 fireworks for which they had no licence. They were each convicted of manslaughter by gross negligence. Held: Though the son’s sentence was reduced for his greater … Continue reading Winter and Another v Regina: CACD 6 Jul 2010
The claimant sued as widow and administratix of her deceased firefighter’s estate. He had died a fire in a building occupied by the respondent. Held: Her appeal failed: ‘the respondents, as occupier of those premises, owed no duty to firemen such as the appellant’s deceased husband who entered the premises for the purpose of fighting … Continue reading Bermingham v Sher Bros: HL 31 Jan 1980
EAT Unfair Dismissal:Reasonableness of dismissal / Contributory fault / Constructive dismissalThe Claimant was dismissed for misconduct, namely pretending that he was unfit to return to work when video footage showed that he was not so unfit. The Employment Tribunal found that the dismissal was unfair. The Respondent’s appeal was allowed; the Employment Tribunal had erred … Continue reading Corus UK Ltd v Mainwaring: EAT 22 Jun 2007
The Authority had required its firemen to attend medical incidents in the place of ambulance crews. It now appealed a finding that that request was not lawfully imposed on its officers. Held: The appeal failed. The collective agreements with the FBU which were in turn incorporated into the individual firefighters’ contracts made no mention of … Continue reading Nottinghamshire Fire and Rescue Authority and Another v The Fire Brigades Union and Bull: CA 28 Feb 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
SCS At this debate on a preliminary plea the court was asked to decide if Grampian Fire and Rescue Service owed a duty of reasonable care to Mr Burnett when fighting a fire which caused to his property. Mr Burnett raised the action in 2002. Held: Lord Macphail decided that if the circumstances of the … Continue reading Burnett v Grampian Fire and Rescue Service: SCS 9 Jan 2007
EAT Employment Tribunal struck out unfair dismissal claims stating they were bound to fail. The employers had made two applications, one for a deposit to be ordered pursuant to rule 20 of the Employment Tribunal rules, and the second for a strike-out pursuant to rule 18(7)(b) on the grounds that the appeal had no reasonable … Continue reading Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust: EAT 25 Jul 2006
Citations: [2008] EWHC 2481 (QB) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen v Brady EAT 31-Mar-2006 The reason adduced by the union for the dismissal of the climant was found by the Tribunal on the facts not to be the true reason for dismissal, the … Continue reading Brady v Norman: QBD 20 Oct 2008
The parties sought a construction of the 1992 Order as to firefighters’ pensions. Judges: Barling J Citations: [2014] EWHC 2177 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes:
The rules of a Trades Union are not to be construed as if they were a statute but are ‘to be given a reasonable interpretation which accords with their intended meaning; bearing in mind their authorship, their purpose and the readership to which they are addressed’ Citations: [1986] ICR 683 Cited by: Cited – Associated … Continue reading Jacques v Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers: 1986
The employee alleged that he had been dismissed for trade Union activities. The Industrial Tribunal held that he had the burden of proving that. The EAT disagreed. Held: The appeal against the decision of the EAT failed.Griffiths LJ said: ‘If an employer produces evidence to the Tribunal that appears to show that the reason for … Continue reading Maund v Penwith District Council: CA 1984
(Scots) Firemen were not immune from suit for negligence as are police; no discretion. Lord Macfadyen observed obiter that he would have rejected a submission that the defenders did not owe to the owners of property affected by a fire which they fought any common law duty to take reasonable care in the course of … Continue reading Duff v Highland and Islands Fire Board: SCS 3 Nov 1995
When considering whether an employer had acted reasonably in a disciplinary hearing, all that section 57 required was (Purchas LJ) ‘that the employer should have a reason falling within the provisions and that, in reaching that reason, he acted reasonably’. Ralph Gibson LJ said: ‘The appeal was by rehearing and there was on that occasion … Continue reading Sartor v P and O European Ferries (Felixstowe) Ltd: CA 1992
The expression ‘persons employed’ does not extend to a fireman who enters a factory in order to put a fire out, though the occupier may well have a duty to warn firemen of an unexpected danger or trap of which he knows or ought to know. Citations: [1954] 1 QB 383 Cited by: Cited – … Continue reading Hartley v Mayoh and Co: 1954
It was not in general necessary that the manager hearing an appeal in a disciplinary matter should insulate himself from the manager who has recommended or implemented a dismissal, and treat himself as a judge hearing two contending parties. The person originally dismissing will often appear at the appeal. Citations: [1982] IRLR 177 Jurisdiction: England … Continue reading Rowe v Radio Rentals Ltd: 1982
The appellant had been employed as a Staff Nurse. He was dismissed after being found to have slapped an elderly patient twice across the buttocks. That incident had been report to the Director of Nursing Services by another Nurse. He was suspended pending an investigation and as part of his investigation th edirector had gone … Continue reading Slater v Leicestershire Health Authority: CA 1989
Union rules should not be interpreted literally or like statutory provisions but in a looser and more benign way Citations: [1987] ICR 150 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen v Brady EAT 31-Mar-2006 The reason adduced by the union for the dismissal of the climant was … Continue reading Hamlet v General Municipal Boilermakers and Allied Trades Union: 1987
It is an essential element of the plea of volenti that the pursuer, against whom the plea is taken, knows of the risk to which he exposes himself: ‘the pursuer against whom it is pleaded must be sciens as well as volenti’. The courts will be able to decide whether or not a person should … Continue reading Flannigan v British Dyewood Co Ltd: SCS 1969
The defendant fish fryer had gone home for the night leaving a burner alight under a pan of fat. The plaintiff fireman was injured attending the consequent fire. He had been ordered onto the roof via a ladder which collapsed when the heat of the fire melted seals on gas rings leading to an escape … Continue reading Salmon v Seafarer Restaurants Ltd, (British Gas Corporation 3rd Party): QBD 1983
The tribunal had found the employee claimant to have been unfairly dismissed when the employer dismissed for redundancy or reorganisation. Although there was a redundancy situation they were not satisfied that the employee was dismissed for that reason rather than that being a pretext for dismissing for another reason, namely his performance.Browne-Wilkinson J said: ‘First, … Continue reading Timex Corporation v Thomson: EAT 1981
A railway company issued and posted the following notice:-‘Enginemen and firemen must not leave the footplate of their engine when the latter is in motion.’ The engine driver of a passenger train running at a fast speed left the footplate of his engine and climbed on to the tender for the purpose of getting coal … Continue reading Bist v London and Southwestern Railway Co: HL 25 Apr 1907
The defendants had left a manhole uncovered and protected only by a tent and paraffin lamp. A child climbed down the hole. When he came out he kicked over one of the lamps. It fell into the hole and caused an explosion. The child was burned. The Court of Session held that there was no … Continue reading Hughes v Lord Advocate: HL 21 Feb 1963
The court heard a judicial review challenge brought by the Government Actuary’s Department to a decision by the Pensions Ombudsman that GAD came within its jurisdiction in respect of acts or omissions relating to the Firemen’s Pension Scheme occurring in the period prior to 6 April 2005. Lord Dyson MR, Moore-Bick, Jackson LJJ [2013] EWCA … Continue reading The Government Actuary’s Department, Regina (on The Application of) v The Pensions Ombudsman: CA 22 Jul 2013
Discrimination – History of interactions relevant When a tribunal considered whether the motive for an act was discriminatory, it should look not just at the act, but should make allowance for earlier acts which might throw more light on the act in question. The Tribunal should assess the totality of the evidence on any material … Continue reading Dr Anya v University of Oxford and Another: CA 22 Mar 2001
A firefighter sought damages for personal injuries from the party negligent in starting a fire, suffered while attending it. Held: A property owner owes a duty of care to firemen, not, by his negligence, to start a fire, or to create special hazards to fire fighting operations. The American ‘firemans rule’ (that a public employee … Continue reading Ogwo v Taylor: HL 19 Nov 1987
B had been dismissed for allegedly being involved with a number of other employees in acts of dishonesty relating to staff purchases. She had denied the abuse. The tribunal had found the dismissal unfair in the methods used to decide to dismiss her. Held: The company’s appeal was allowed. The store had reasonable grounds for … Continue reading British Home Stores Ltd v Burchell: EAT 1978
There was a fire at the petitioner’s premises. The firemen, employed by the respondent, were in an industrial dispute and drove to the fire slowly. One was said to have commented: ‘we are on a go-slow and even if my mother was in there, it would have to burn down. I want my raise of … Continue reading General Engineering Services v Kingston and Saint Andrew Corporation: PC 21 Nov 1988
Contact visiting plants supported asbestos claim The deceased had worked as a lorry driver regularly collecting pulverized fuel ash from a power station. On his visits he was at areas with asbestos dust. He came to die from mesothelioma. His widow now pursued his claim that the respondent had failed to comply with the 1931 … Continue reading McDonald v National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc: SC 22 Oct 2014
The ‘just and equitable’ test warranted the reduction or extinction of compensation for an employee who has been unfairly dismissed and then found to have been liable to summary dismissal. ‘The paragraph does not, nor did s. 116 of the Act of 1971, provide that regard should be had only to the loss resulting from … Continue reading W Devis and Sons Ltd v Atkins: HL 6 Jul 1977
The claimants asserted negligence in the defendant in failing to provide an adequate response to an emergency call, leading, they said to the death of their daughter at the hands of her violent partner. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The . .
A railway servant was responsible for manning a station building. He left it unattended without telling his employers that he was doing so and he left a coal fire burning inside in an open stove. The stove was piled high with coal and a burning coal . .
The plaintiff fireman was injured when fighting a fire at a factory where the defendants had allowed large quantities of fine dust containing aluminium and carbon particles to accumulate. The plaintiff was injured by a dust explosion caused by the . .
