Briscoe v Lubrizol Limited: CA 23 Apr 2002

The claimant had been employed by the respondents. Having been injured he claimed under a long-term disability scheme underwritten by insurers. They discontinued payment, and the company dismissed him. He now claimed damages for breach of contract. The issue centered on whether his benefit was governed by the company handbook or the insurance policy.
Held: The handbook governed the contract, but incorporated the terms and benefits of the policy. The company had tried to contact him to discuss a return to work. They claimed to be entitled to treat his failure to reply as repudiatory of the contract. Though it is necessary for an employee to co-operate, the employer had concealed the true reason for the meetings requested, and the behaviour did not amount to repudiation.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward Lord Justice Potter And Mr Justice Bodey

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 508, [2002] IRLR 607, [2002] Emp LR 819

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedVillella v MFI Furniture Centres Limited 1999
. .
See AlsoBriscoe v Lubrizol Ltd and Another CA 27-Oct-1999
Insurers underwriting a company’s permanent health insurance scheme had no duty of care directly to a company employee to ensure that his claim was processed properly. Their duty was owed to the company only. The employee was not a party to the . .

Cited by:

CitedMason v Huddersfield Giants Ltd QBD 15-Jul-2013
The claimant rugby league player complained of his dismissal under a clause allowing such for behaviour which might bring the club into disrepute. He had engaged in a celebratory evening out involving a naked run. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Contract

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171217