commercial_howleyEAT2012
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Compensation
In a hearing on remedies for unfair dismissal, the Employment Tribunal held that the Respondent employer had to pay compensation for, inter alia, the losses suffered by the Claimant employee, who as a result of his dismissal was deprived of the use of the car, the mobile phone and the fuel allowance provided by the Respondent employer.
The Respondent appealed on the basis that the chain of causation for the Claimant’s loss had been broken because the Claimant had been working for a short period after his dismissal with the consequence that his subsequent losses were not attributed to his dismissal by the respondent.
Held:
1. The Employment Tribunal was entitled to hold that the fact that the Claimant had been working did not prevent it from holding that subsequent losses incurred by him were attributable to his dismissal by the Respondent and that the chain of causation had not been broken (Dench v Flynn and Partners [1998] IRLR 653 applied).
2. The remaining appeals and cross-appeals were dismissed, subject to some recalculations
Silber J
[2012] UKEAT 0636 – 11 – 0608
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Dench v Flynn and Partners (a Firm) CA 9-Jun-1998
The appellant had been dismissed for redundancy. She sought to appeal saying that there had been no redundancy. The tribunal had refused to award damages for the period after she had found alternative employment.
Held: The obtaining of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Damages
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.463522