The claimant school teacher had been dismissed, after a finding that she had assaulted a pupil. She denied the assualt.
Held: The School’s appeal against the decision of the EAT to re-instate the claim of unfair dismissal succeeded. The EAT had wrongly substituted its won veiw of the facts for that of the Tribunal. However on the claim for wrongful dismissal, the EAT had perversely allowed the school’s claim that a statement by the claimant had amounted to an admission. The claim for wrongful dismissal must be re-instated and that case remitted.
Judges:
Maurice LJ VP, Toulson, Jackson LJJ
Citations:
[2013] EWCA Civ 198
Links:
Statutes:
Employment Rights Act 1996 98(4)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
First EAT – Nugent Care v Boardman EAT 25-May-2010
EAT Reasonableness of dismissal
Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissal
Appeal by employers and cross-appeal by employee against Employment Tribunal’s finding of unfair dismissal for gross . .
Appeal from – Boardman v Nugent Care Society and Another EAT 10-Jul-2012
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal
Appeal by employee against Employment Tribunal’s finding (majority decision) that claims of unfair and wrongful dismissal fail. Teacher dismissed for gross . .
Cited – British Home Stores Ltd v Burchell EAT 1978
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. . .
Cited – Fuller v London Borough of Brent CA 15-Mar-2011
The employers had dismissed the employee for misconduct. The Tribunal found that the employers had a genuine belief in the misconduct alleged and there had been a reasonable investigation. The real issue was whether it was reasonable to dismiss for . .
Cited – Turner v East Midlands Trains Ltd CA 16-Nov-2012
The employee, a train ticket conductor, was accused without direct evidence of manipulating her machine to produce false tickets which she was then said to have sold.
Held: Elias LJ said that the Tribunal: ‘has to ask whether the employer . .
Cited – Sinclair Roche and Temperley and others v Heard and Another EAT 22-Jul-2004
EAT Sex discrimination claim by former partners against the partnership and individual partners: direct discrimination (in both cases) and indirect discrimination (in one) found by ET.
(i) ET must, if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471755