References: Ind Summary 21-Mar-1994, Times 23-Feb-1994
Ratio: A stigma arising from an association with a notorious employer gave rise to no cause of action.
This case is cited by:
- At First Instance – Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International HL (Gazette 25-Jun-97, House of Lords, Bailii, [1997] 3 WLR 95, [1997] UKHL 23, [1998] AC 20, [1997] ICR 606, [1997] 3 All ER 1, [1997] IRLR 462)
The employees claimed damages, saying that the way in which their employer had behaved during their employment had led to continuing losses, ‘stigma damages’ after the termination.
Held: It is an implied term of any contract of employment that . . - Appeal from – Malik and Another v Bank of Credit and Commerce International Sa CA (Times 12-Apr-95, Independent 17-Mar-95)
No compensation was payable for a stigma of innocent workers having worked for a fraudulent bank. . .
(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 01-Sep-16
Ref: 83351
