Site icon swarb.co.uk

Gisda Cyf v Barratt: CA 2 Jul 2009

The employer wrote to the employee on 29 November 2006 informing her of her dismissal, the letter arrived on the 30th, and she read it on the 4th of December. The employer appealed against a finding that the effective date of dismissal was the date on which she read the letter.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘The expression ‘effective date of termination’ is not a term of contract law which has found its way into employment protection legislation. It is a statutory construct specifically designed and defined for the purposes of a legislative scheme of employment rights based on a personal contract.’ It was the employer who had chosen this method of notification. The need for fairness, and the weight of authority also indicated that the EAT had been correct. (Lloyd LJ dissenting)

Mummery, Lloyd LJJ, Sir Paul Kennedy
[2009] EWCA Civ 648, [2009] ICR 1408, [2009] IRLR 934
Bailii
Employment Rights Act 1996 97(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBrown v Southall and Knight EAT 1980
The employee had gone on holiday at the time when the letter of dismissal arrived at his home and he did not actually see it until he had returned from his holiday.
Held: The ‘effective date of termination’ is a statutory concept which focuses . .
CitedMcMaster v Manchester Airport Plc EAT 27-Oct-1997
The claimant was summarily dismissed by letter while on sickness leave. The letter arrived 9 November 1995, but he was on a day trip to France. He read the letter on return the day after. His unfair dismissal complaint was received by the industrial . .
Appeal fromGisda Cyf v Barratt EAT 24-Jul-2008
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS: Claim in time and effective date of termination
Where a decision to dismiss is communicated by a letter sent to the employee at home, and the employee has neither gone away . .
CitedKirklees Metropolitan Council v Radecki CA 8-Apr-2009
The council appealed against a finding that the claimant’s case had been brought in time. There had been negotiations for a compromise agreement which had failed. The EAT had found it unclear that the employment had ended at the point asserted by . .
MentionedBrimnes, The Tenax Steamship Co v Brimnes, Owners of 1973
. .
DistinguishedBrimnes, the Tenax Steamship Co v Brimnes, Owners of CA 23-May-1974
The ship’s owners sent a telex to the charterers at 5.45 pm on 2 April 1970 withdrawing the vessel for late payment of the hire charge. The charterers’ normal business hours ended at 6.00 pm. The telex was not seen until the morning of 3 April, . .
CitedOctavius Atkinson and Sons Ltd v Morris CA 1989
The employee claimed unfair dismissal. He had been dismissed without notice at 2:00pm. Later the employer discovered that it might have offered alternate employment. The Tribunal had found that the opportunity emerged before the employee got home, . .
CitedWiddicombe v Longcombe Software Ltd EAT 11-Dec-1997
Any ambiguity as to notice of the date of termination is to be strictly construed against the employer. . .
CitedPotter and others v RJ Temple Plc (in liquidation) EAT 18-Dec-2003
The claimants faxed on the evening to the employers an acceptance of the employer’s repudiation of their contracts. The claim was not presented to the tribunal until the same day of the month three months later.
Held: The claim was out of . .
CitedGisda Cyf v Barratt CA 2-Jul-2009
The employer wrote to the employee on 29 November 2006 informing her of her dismissal, the letter arrived on the 30th, and she read it on the 4th of December. The employer appealed against a finding that the effective date of dismissal was the date . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromGisda Cyf v Barratt SC 13-Oct-2010
The parties disputed the effective date of termination of the claimant’s employment. Was it the date on which the letter notifying her was sent, or was it on the day she received it. She had been dimissed without notice, and the date was the date on . .
CitedNewcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood SC 25-Apr-2018
Notice of dismissal begins when received by worker
The court was asked: ‘If an employee is dismissed on written notice posted to his home address, when does the notice period begin to run? Is it when the letter would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post? Or when it was in fact . .
CitedGisda Cyf v Barratt CA 2-Jul-2009
The employer wrote to the employee on 29 November 2006 informing her of her dismissal, the letter arrived on the 30th, and she read it on the 4th of December. The employer appealed against a finding that the effective date of dismissal was the date . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.372325

Exit mobile version