Category: Employment

Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 1 Mar 1998

Judges:

Byrt QC HHJ

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 351 – 98 – 0103

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 30-Jul-1997
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 15-Dec-1999
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal . .
See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 1-Feb-2000
The question is whether, a full Employment Tribunal having been empanelled to hear and determine the appellant, Mrs Unwin’s complaint of victimisation contrary to the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Chairman of that Employment Tribunal, Mr Rich, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206293

Glennie v Independent Magazines (UK) Ltd: EAT 2 Apr 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1262 – 97 – 0204

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Glennie v Independent Magazines Ltd EAT 2-Dec-1997
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Glennie v Independent Magazines (UK) Limited CA 17-Jun-1999
A party is under a duty to present his entire case at the first hearing in the Employment Tribunal. Where a claimant’s representative had decided to adopt a particular position in law when making representations to the original industrial tribunal, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206326

Toach and Another v British United Shoe Machinery Ltd: EAT 4 Mar 1998

Appeal from a decision of the Industrial Tribunal sitting in Leicester in which they dismissed the applications which were brought for breach of contract. Both applicants claimed breach of contract concerning an agreement which existed between their union, AEEU, and the respondents.

Judges:

Pugsley HHJ

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 429 – 97 – 0403

Links:

Bailii

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206290

Farnsworth Ltd v McCoid: EAT 27 Mar 1998

The Applicant had worked as a factory operative and was a duly elected shop steward. There was an agreement between the employers and the Transport and General Workers Union and under that agreement the employers had the right to de-recognise a shop steward if his conduct came into question.

Judges:

Butter QC HHJ

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1266 – 97 – 2703

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 146

Cited by:

Appeal from – F W Farnsworth Limited v McCoid CA 31-Mar-1999
A company which refused to recognise a union shop steward as such, because of the way in which he behaved, was treating him less favourably to restrict those activities, despite the fact that he had not been treated worse as an employee.
In . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206225

Whiffen v Milham Ford Girls School and Another: EAT 12 Feb 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 864 – 97 – 1202

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Whiffen v Milham Ford Girls School and Another EAT 28-Oct-1999
. .
At EAT -1 – Whiffen v Milham Ford Girls’ School and Oxfordshire County Council CA 21-Mar-2001
The local authority’s redundancy policy required the school first to choose for redundancy those on fixed term temporary contracts. The applicant’s contract had not been renewed, and she had been replaced by a teacher with lesser qualifications. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206186

Vicary v British Telecommunications Plc: EAT 19 Feb 1998

A medical report in a disability discrimination claim should deal with the doctor’s diagnosis of the impairments, the doctor’s observation of the applicant carrying out day to day activities and the ease with which he was able to perform those functions, together with any relevant opinion as to prognosis and the effect of medication. Morison P said: ‘The fact that the medical adviser had been told on some disability discrimination course or seminar that something was or was not a normal day-to-day activity is not of relevance to the tribunal’s determination. It is not for a doctor to express an opinion as to what is a normal day-to-day activity. That is a matter for them to consider using their basic common sense. Equally, it was not for the expert to tell the tribunal whether the impairments which had been found proved were or were not substantial. Again that was a matter for the employment tribunal to arrive at its own assessment. What, of course, a medical expert was entitled to do was to put forward her own observations of the applicant carrying out day-to-day activities and to comment on the case or otherwise with which she was performing those functions. She obviously also was entitled to give any prognosis that might be relevant and to give an opinion as to the position about the effect of medication.’

Judges:

Morison P

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1297 – 98 – 1902, [1999] IRLR 680

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995

Cited by:

Cited – Abadeh v British Telecommunications Plc EAT 19-Oct-2000
EAT The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim under the 1995 Act. He was a telephone operator injured after a sudden shriek in his ear. They had found him not to be disabled within the 1995 Act.
Held: . .
Cited – Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis EAT 23-Jul-2007
EAT PART TIME WORKERS
A police officer was found by the Tribunal to be significantly disadvantaged compared with his peers when carrying out examinations for promotion. Nonetheless, the Tribunal held that he . .
Cited – East Sussex County Council v Hancock EAT 5-Nov-2003
EAT The Council appealed against a finding that the respondent, their employee, was disabled under the 1995 Act. He suffered from a long term mixed anxiety and depression disorder, but the Council disputed that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206184

South Wales Police v Walters and others: EAT 27 Feb 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 621 – 97 – 2702

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Owusu v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority EAT 1-Mar-1995
The employee complained of his employer’s repeated failure to regrade him, and alleged discrimination. The employer said his claim was out of time.
Held: Mummery J made the distinction between single acts of discrimination, and continuing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206174

Mostyn House School v Stovell: EAT 20 Feb 1998

Judges:

Peter Clarke HHJ

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 854 – 97 – 2002

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Adams v GKN Sankey Ltd EAT 1980
The employee had been given twelve weeks notice of redundancy dismissal, and was not required to attend work during the notice period, but then worked additional days. A letter was written in November stating ‘you are given 12 weeks’ notice of . .
See Also – Mostyn House School v Stovell EAT 23-Oct-1997
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206150

Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospitals and others: EAT 27 Feb 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1111 – 97 – 2702

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust and others EAT 16-Jul-1997
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospitals and others EAT 1-May-1998
. .
See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust and others EAT 23-Jul-1999
. .
See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospitals and others CA 10-Jul-2001
. .
See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust and Another EAT 18-Jun-2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206145

Lockwood v Permic Ltd (T/A Permic Emergency Lighting): EAT 10 Feb 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 694 – 97 – 1002

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206140

Julienne v Post Office and Another: EAT 19 Feb 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 829 – 97 – 1902

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206135

Hall v Woolston Hall Leisure Ltd: EAT 5 Feb 1998

Judges:

Peter Clark J

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 243 – 97 – 0502

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Hall v Woolston Hall Leisure Limited CA 23-May-2000
The fact that an employment contract was tainted with illegality of which the employee was aware, did not deprive the employee of the possibility of claiming rights which were due to her under a statute which created rights associated with but not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206126

Glendale Grounds Management v Bradley: EAT 19 Feb 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 484 – 97 – 1902, EAT/484/97

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – BET Catering Services Ltd v Ball and others EAT 28-Nov-1996
Mrs Ball was an employee of a London Borough whose contract incorporated the NJC conditions. Following her TUPE transfer to BET, a private sector employer, the NJC promulgated terms that included pay increases. The issue was whether BET was obliged . .

Cited by:

Cited – Alemo-Herron v Parkwood Leisure Ltd EAT 12-Jan-2009
EAT TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS: Acquired rights directive
TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS: Varying terms of employment
As a matter of construction of TUPE Reg 5(1), a contractual term entitling employees to . .
Cited – Parkwood Leisure Ltd v Alemo-Herron and 23 Others CA 29-Jan-2010
The employees asserted unauthorised deductions from their wages. The company appealed against an order re-instating their claims. When employed by the council, the claimants had the right to pay increases in accordance with rates set by national . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206121