Abusive language between employer and employee may be repudiatory of the contract. However, an apology may lead to the conclusion that the conduct is not repudiatory but this is likely to be only the position where the words were spoken in heat and haste and the apology is heartfelt and sincere.
In proceedings before Industrial Tribunals for unfair dismissal the onus lies on the employers, if they seek to establish the point, to satisfy the Tribunal that even if the proper fair procedure had been carried through, it would have made no difference to the result. It is then for the claimant to establish that the job has been lost and that he or she has no other or less remunerative employment.
Citations:
[1976] IRLR 248
Cited by:
Cited – Polkey v A E Dayton Services Limited HL 19-Nov-1987
Mr Polkey was employed as a driver. The company decided to replace four van drivers with two van salesmen and a representative. Mr Polkey and two other van drivers were made redundant. Without warning, he was called in and informed that he had been . .
Cited – Gledhill v Bentley Designs (UK) Ltd Merc 2-Jun-2010
. .
Cited – Oderinde v Datapact Ltd EAT 14-Jan-2002
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation . .
Cited – Britool Ltd v Roberts and others EAT 1-Apr-1993
. .
Cited – Wolesley Centers Ltd v Simmons EAT 24-May-1993
The EAT considered the Polkey principle: ‘a finding that a dismissal is unfair does not mean that an employee is entitled to full compensation for the loss resulting from the loss of his job. He is only entitled to the loss he has sustained which is . .
Cited – Polkey v A E Dayton Services Limited HL 19-Nov-1987
Mr Polkey was employed as a driver. The company decided to replace four van drivers with two van salesmen and a representative. Mr Polkey and two other van drivers were made redundant. Without warning, he was called in and informed that he had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.445478