Transfer of Undertakings; Share Incentive Plan; Obligation ‘In Connection With’ The Contract of Employment The claimant’s contract of employment transferred to the appellant under TUPE, 2006 on 1 May 2020. Prior to the transfer, he had been a member of a Share Incentive Plan operated by the transferor which he had joined in August 2018 … Continue reading Ponticelli UK Ltd v Gallagher: EAT 12 Sep 2022
The employee claimed that the behaviour which gave rise to her dismissal was a protected disclosure, and that her motive was irrelevant. Held: The fact that what was disclosed was true was not conclusive to protect the disclosure. The court could look to motive, and a bad motive might defeat the protection even if the … Continue reading Street v Derbyshire Unemployed Workers Centre: EAT 22 Sep 2003
EAT (Practice and Procedure : Striking-Out or Dismissal) The Employment Judge ought not to have struck out the Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust [2007] ICR 1126 applied. Judges: Richardson J Citations: [2011] UKEAT 0182 – 11 – 0909 Links: Bailii … Continue reading Pillay v Inc Research UK Ltd: EAT 9 Sep 2011
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Automatically unfair reasonsThe Tribunal erred in law in holding that words spoken at a meeting by the Claimant did not amount to information for the purposes of section 43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Cavendish Munro Professional Risks Management v Geduld [2010] ICR 125 applied.The Tribunal … Continue reading Freeman v Ultra Green Group Ltd: EAT 9 Aug 2011
This appeal concerns the directly effective right of police officers under EU law to have the principle of equal treatment applied to them. The question raised is whether the enforcement of that right by means of proceedings in the Employment Tribunal is barred by the principle of judicial immunity, where the allegedly discriminatory conduct is … Continue reading P v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: SC 25 Oct 2017
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Claim in time and effective date of terminationClaimant given notice of dismissal subject to a right of appeal and on the basis that the employment would not terminate if she lodged an appeal by a prescribed deadline, which she was treated as having done – Claimant presents claim in advance of … Continue reading The Governing Body of Wishmorecross School v Balado: EAT 12 Jul 2011
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – CompensationPRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barkebr />The successful Claimant worked in the NHS from 1983 but for the Respondent Trust only from 2006. The dispute about this was raised in submissions on the basic award. The Employment Tribunal calculated back to 1983. The EAT allowed the jurisdictional point about Employment Rights … Continue reading Winchester and Eastleigh Healthcare NHS Trust v Walker: EAT 24 Jun 2011
EAT RIGHTS ON INSOLVENCYThe Employment Judge erred in law in making an award of notice pay under section 182 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 when the employer company was not insolvent as defined in section 183(1) and (3). Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Walden [2000] IRLR 168 applied. Judges: Richardson j … Continue reading The Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills v Coward and Another: EAT 21 Jul 2011
mchoice_aaldersEAT2011 EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Claim in time and effective date of terminationThe employee was dismissed on notice expiring on 1 February 2011. On its expiry she would have had sufficient qualifying service to present a complaint of unfair dismissal. On 11 January 2011 during her period of notice she presented a complaint of unfair … Continue reading M-Choice UK Ltd v Aalders: EAT 10 Aug 2011
EAT UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGESThe Claimants made claims against their employer for an unlawful deduction from their wages contrary to the provisions of section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, in respect of money due under its bonus scheme for the years 2009 and 2010. The Claimants had been dismissed by reason of gross … Continue reading Hellewell and Another v Axa Services Ltd and Another: EAT 25 Jul 2011
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissalVICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureThe ET erred in holding that the Appellant lecturer was fairly dismissed for misconduct in refusing to undertake duties which the Respondent required her to undertake. The ET failed to consider whether the employer had conducted a proper investigation into the agreement reached as to … Continue reading Smith v London Metropolitan University: EAT 21 Jul 2011
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Retirement UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Polkey deduction Employee reaching retirement age requests extension – Employer purports to follow procedure under Schedule 6 of Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 and rejects request – Tribunal holds, on basis of admissions from employer’s witnesses, that the managers in question regarded themselves as absolutely bound by … Continue reading Compass Group Plc v Ayodele: EAT 14 Jul 2011
EAT Contract of Employment – Definition of Employee Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P) Citations: EAT/492/02, [2002] UKEAT 492 – 02 – 1112 Links: Bailii, EAT Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – McMeechan v Secretary of State for Employment CA 11-Dec-1996 The respondent as a temporary worker was … Continue reading Dacas v Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd, Wandsworth London Borough Council: EAT 12 Nov 2002
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureThe issue was whether a complaint under section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 had been presented in time. The employment judge ruled that that issue should be decided when the Claimant’s other claims were considered on their merits, because evidence was required to decide whether the various detriments … Continue reading St John Ambulance v Mulvie: EAT 1 Jul 2011
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS Worker, employee or neither Agency relationships The Claimants were not employees of Respondent 4, on its insolvency the Secretary of State had no liability to them under s.182-188 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Judges: Serota QC J Citations: [2011] UKEAT 0571 – 10 – 1705 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act … Continue reading The Secretary of State for Business Innovations and Skills v Studders and Others: EAT 17 May 2011
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Automatically unfair reasonsUnfair dismissal – automatically unfair reasons – health and safety cases.Section 100(1)(e) should be applied in two stages. Firstly, the Tribunal should consider whether the criteria set out in that provision have been met, as a matter of fact. Were there circumstances of danger which the employee reasonably believed … Continue reading Oudahar v Esporta Group Ltd (Unfair Dismissal : Automatically Unfair Reasons): EAT 22 Jun 2011
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissalThe Employment Tribunal’s reasons show that the majority did not correctly apply section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. London Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Small [2009] IRLR 563 and Fuller v London Borough of Brent [2011] EWCA Civ 267 considered. Judges: Richardson J Citations: [2011] UKEAT 0007 … Continue reading Eaga Plc v Tideswell: EAT 16 May 2011
Employee, Worker or Self-Employed – Section 230, (B) Employment Rights Act 1996 The claimant was elected to office as a non-executive director of the first respondent; it was his case that he suffered detriments as a result of making protected disclosures and he sought to bring a claim before the Employment Tribunal (‘ET’) under section … Continue reading Catt v English Table Tennis Association Ltd and Others: EAT 26 Aug 2022
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALAn act is on the ground that an employer has made a protected disclosure within the meaning of the Employment Rights Act 1996 section 47B if it is done by reason of such a disclosure or because the act was inherently for such a reason. Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Khan … Continue reading Vivian v Bournemouth Borough Council: EAT 4 Feb 2011
EAT WORKING TIME REGULATIONSVICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Whistleblowing1. The Claimant was a ‘mobile worker’ to whom the Road Transport (Working Time) Regulations 2005 (‘the RTR’) applied. The Tribunal did not consider the RTR; and if it had considered the RTR ought to have found that the Claimant was correct in asserting that if the Respondent required … Continue reading Ross v Eddie Stobart Ltd: EAT 14 Jan 2011
The applicant cleaner sought compensation for unfair dismissal. The issue was whether she was an employee of the respondents, of their client where she did her work, or was not an employee at all. She worked for an agency, who sent her out to offices to work. The court was called upon to give guidance … Continue reading Brook Street Bureau (UK) Ltd v Dacas: CA 5 Mar 2004
The applicant had left on maternity leave. Before leaving, her salary had been increased, but the increase was not back-dated to any part of the period over which the regulations required her average earnings to be calculated for statutory maternity pay. She asserted discrimination, and unlawful deductions from her wages. Should her case be referred … Continue reading Alabaster v Woolwich Plc, Secretary of State for Social Security: CA 26 Feb 2002
The employee complained of her dismissal having made protected disclosures. The company said that the dismissal was for reasons of inadequate work. Held: The company’s appeal succeeded. Subject to possible qualifications said to be irrelevant to the present case, a tribunal required to determine ‘the reason (or, if more than one, the principal reason) for … Continue reading Royal Mail Ltd v Jhuti: CA 20 Oct 2017
EAT (Practice and Procedure) 1. While there is no express power provided by the ETA 1996 or the 2013 Rules made under it, the appointment of a litigation friend is within the power to make a case management order in the 2013 Rules as a procedural matter in a case where otherwise a litigant who … Continue reading Jhuti v Royal Mail Group Ltd and Others: EAT 31 Jul 2017
EAT Victimisation Discrimination: Dismissal – Whether the Employment Tribunal’s determination that dismissal was not automatically unfair under section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 because the person who decided to dismiss was misled by the Claimant’s line manager (to whom she had made a protected disclosure) who engineered her dismissal because she had done so was … Continue reading Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti: EAT 19 May 2016
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Automatically unfair reasons Public Interest Disclosure Section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 inadmissible reason for dismissal – burden of proof – whether Protected Disclosures – case remitted to same Employment Tribunal for further consideration. Judges: His Honour Judge Clark Citations: [2007] UKEAT 0516 – 06 – 0203, UKEAT/0516/06, [2007] … Continue reading Dr Kuzel v Roche Products Ltd: EAT 2 Mar 2007
Lord Cairns said: ‘A reason for the dismissal of an employee is a set of facts known to the employer, or it may be of beliefs held by him, which cause him to dismiss the employee. If at the time of his dismissal the employer gives a reason for it, that is no doubt evidence, … Continue reading Abernethy v Mott Hay and Anderson: CA 1974
The appeal was against the refusal of a tribunal to extend time on just and equitable grounds for the bringing of a claim by the Second Claimant for a redundancy payment under section 135 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal’s reason for that decision was that the Second Claimant would be unlikely to … Continue reading Dhungana v Rai and Others: EAT 25 Jul 2022
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALAn act is on the ground that an employer has made a protected disclosure within the meaning of the Employment Rights Act 1996 section 47B if it is done by reason of such a disclosure or because the act was inherently for such a reason. Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Khan … Continue reading Vivian v Bournemouth Borough Council: EAT 6 May 2011
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALReasonableness of dismissalS.98A(2) Employment Rights Act 1996The new Employment Tribunal on remission from the EAT correctly found the Claimants were unfairly dismissed for redundancy. It correctly construed s 98A(2) as not applicable where the Respondent failed to complete Step 2 of the SDDP: Davies applied. Judges: McMullen QC J Citations: [2011] UKEAT 0407 … Continue reading Peninsula Business Services Ltd v Rees and Others: EAT 21 Apr 2011
The claimant appealed refusal to award damages after an alleged failure to give a proper reference, saying that the decision in Fadipe could not stand with the later decision in Rhys-Harper. She said that she had suffered victimisation after making a protected disclosure, but after having left the company. The company said that the Act … Continue reading Woodward v Abbey National Plc: CA 22 Jun 2006
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Extension of time: reasonably practicableThe Employment Tribunal had correctly directed itself that the evidential burden of proving under section 111(2)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, in cases where it is it is satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable for the complaint to be presented before the end of the … Continue reading Locke v Tabfine Ltd (T/A Hands Music Centre): EAT 29 Nov 2010
The employer appealed against a finding that it should pay former commission agents hioliday pay for the entire period since the coming into force of the Regulations. Judges: Peter Clark J Citations: [2004] UKEAT 0657 – 03 – 1301 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996, Working Time Regulations 1998 Employment Updated: 06 September 2022; … Continue reading Canada Life Ltd v Gray and Another: EAT 13 Jan 2004
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Worker, employee or neitherAppeal by an Army Cadet Force Adult Instructor from the judgment of an Employment Judge sitting alone that he was a volunteer and not in ’employment’ as defined by s68(1) Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as amended. Appeal dismissed. The Employment Judge was correct as his factual findings were … Continue reading Breakell v West Midlands Reserve Forces’ and Cadets’ Association Named As Shropshire Army Cadet Force: EAT 11 Apr 2011
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Estoppel or abuse of process/AmendmentThe appeal was dismissed on issue estoppel. Issue estoppel applied not to the declarations made by the first Employment Tribunal, as apparently decided in the Pre Hearing Review judgment, but to the breach of contract issues that had been decided at that first hearing as stated … Continue reading Parker v Northumbrian Water: EAT 30 Mar 2011
The claimants had been employed by a company with a normal retirement age of 60. The company was sold to British Airways, wher eh normal age was 55. On being obliged to retire the claimed unfair dismissal. They now appealed dismissal of that claim. Held: The applicable normal age of retirement under an employment contract … Continue reading Cross, Gibson v British Airways Plc: CA 11 May 2006
Unfair Dismissal — Constructive Dismissal – Reason for Dismissal Including Some Other Substantial ReasonThe ET upheld the Claimant’s complaint of constructive unfair dismissal, finding that the Respondent’s conduct of an investigatory process into allegations of misconduct was such as to be likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence and amounted … Continue reading Retirement Security Ltd v Wilson: EAT 11 Jul 2019
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Claim in time and effective date of termination(1) Employment Judge erred in finding that the employer had caused the employee to make an error in his calculation of the three month time limit in failing to disabuse him of his mistake when there was no evidence of any misrepresentation or deliberation … Continue reading T Mobile (Uk) Ltd v Singleton: EAT 23 Mar 2011
Grand Chamber – The first applicant said he had been injured by a shot fired by a British soldier who had been carried for two miles into the Republic of Ireland, clinging to the applicant’s vehicle following an incident at a checkpoint. Held: Rules granting the State immunities, did not infringe the applicants’ right to … Continue reading McElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Nov 2001
JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – excluded employments – employee shareholder – Section 205A Employment Rights Act 1996 In September 2015, the Claimant had entered into a section 205A employee shareholder agreement. It was agreed that this had met the requirements provided such that the Claimant thereby became an employee shareholder and was thus excluded from the statutory … Continue reading Barrasso v New Look Retailers Ltd: EAT 22 Aug 2019
EATR UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal Employment Tribunal found dismissal for redundancy reason unfair under s98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996 on two grounds; (i) selection (ii) alternative employment. As to (i) ET substituted own view as to a fair selection procedure and as to (ii) failed to consider whether employer’s attempts to find alternative … Continue reading Amazon.Co.Uk.Ltd v Hurdus: EAT 10 Feb 2011
EAT Reason for dismissal including substantial other reasonable adjustmentsReasonableness of dismissalClaimant dismissed because major customer of Respondent stated that claimant was banned from its premises. Employment Tribunal held dismissal justified because of ‘some other substantial reason’. Respondent appealed.Held: case had to be remitted to Employment Tribunal as in the original decision there was no consideration … Continue reading Greenwood v Whiteghyll Plastics Ltd: EAT 6 Aug 2007
Regulation 4 of the Requirements for Teachers (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (‘the 2005 Regulations’), provides that a local education authority can employ only registered teachers. The issue in this appeal (brought by the local education authority) is whether the term ‘registered teacher’ in that provision simply means a teacher whose details have been entered on to … Continue reading Dumfries and Galloway Council v Carroll: EAT 7 Aug 2019
Following her resignation, the Claimant presented a claim form. The Respondent had written her a letter in August 2016 proposing that her employment be terminated on the basis of a settlement agreement. Her case was that this was a reaction to the news that she was pregnant, that there had been a history of various … Continue reading Harrison v Aryman Ltd (Admissibility of Evidence): EAT 27 Aug 2019
EAT REDUNDANCYThere was no error in the application of s221 and Gilbert to the calculation of the Claimant’s redundancy payment. Judges: McMullen QC J Citations: [2010] UKEAT 0767 – 10 – 1412 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 221 Employment Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.428719
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL Reasonableness of dismissal S.98A(2) ERA Claimant dismissed for gross misconduct. Employment Tribunal found unfair dismissal but (a) placed the burden of proof on the Respondent instead of applying a neutral burden of proof. It also misunderstood s.98A(2) ERA 1996; failed to make a Polkey finding; failed to make a finding on contributory … Continue reading Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Marks: EAT 23 Nov 2010
bullock_norfolkEAT11 EAT RIGHT TO BE ACCOMPANIED The Employment Tribunal did not err in holding that the Claimant, a foster carer, was not a worker within the meaning of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and 1999. Accordingly she could not claim the right to trade union representation pursuant to section 10 of the Employment Rights Act … Continue reading Bullock v Norfolk County Council: EAT 24 Jan 2011
Sex Discrimination — Burden of ProofThe liability judgment The ET did not err in law in dismissing the Claimant’s complaints of unlawful discrimination, victimisation and harassment. In one respect – relating to the ET’s reasoning concerning the burden of proof – the EAT’s decision is by a majority, Mr Hunter dissenting – see paragraphs 61-76. … Continue reading Solomon v University of Hertfordshire and Another: EAT 29 Oct 2019
EAT TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS – Consultation and other informationThe cap on ‘a week’s pay’ under s.227 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 does not apply to awards for compensation under reg. 15 (8) of TUPE for breach of the information and consultation obligations. Citations: [2010] UKEAT 0312 – 10 – 1911 Links: Bailii Employment Updated: … Continue reading Zaman and Others v Kozee Sleep Products Ltd (T/A Dorlux Beds UK): EAT 19 Nov 2010
The claimants were airline pilots employed by the respondent company with headquarters in Hong Kong. The court was asked whether an English Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear their complaints of unfair dismissal. Held: The pilots were employed in England so as to allow a claim for unfair dismissal here. Judges: Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, … Continue reading Crofts and others v Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and others: CA 19 May 2005
lEAT Working Time Regulation 1998 – detriment – Section 45A Employment Rights Act 1996 Unfair Dismissal – automatically unfair reason for dismissal – Section 101A Employment Rights Act 1996 The Claimant, who worked as a Kitchen Porter, had been denied his right to a rest break (contrary to Regulation 10 WTR and his contractual entitlement) … Continue reading Pazur v Lexington Catering Services Ltd: EAT 20 Aug 2019
The Claimant had relied on a number of causes of action in his ET claim, including an allegation of an automatically unfair health and safety dismissal contrary to s.100(1)(b) ERA 1996 for his having sought to undertake a workplace inspection in his capacity as a Safety Representative under the Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations … Continue reading Markham v Asda Stores Ltd (Health and Safety): EAT 15 Aug 2019
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Wrongful dismissalEmployment Tribunal found Claimant guilty of serious misconduct for which dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses; but that it did not amount to gross misconduct therefore the dismissal was unfair. Applying s98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996, finding of unfair dismissal was … Continue reading Weston Recovery Services v Fisher: EAT 7 Oct 2010
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity MATERNITY RIGHTS AND PARENTAL LEAVE – PregnancyUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Contributory faultThe Employment Tribunal which found in favour of the Claimant in part did not show apparent bias on five grounds, although it made errors of fact on two of them. Observations disapproving the Respondent’s showing … Continue reading Nixon v Ross Coates Solicitors and Another: EAT 6 Aug 2010
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Striking-out/dismissal Preliminary issues Issue as to whether Claimant was dismissed under s95(1)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996 for purpose of her unfair dismissal claim ought to be dealt with as a preliminary issue at a PHR, rather than at a full merits hearing. Plainly it should on the basis of the Respondent’s … Continue reading Wm A Merrick (Formerly T/A Wm A Merrick and Co Solicitors) v Simpson: EAT 20 Aug 2010
EAT SEX DISCRIMINATIONBurden of proofPregnancy and discriminationUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Automatically unfair reasonsRegulation 10(3)(a) and Regulation 10(3)(b) of the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations 1999 must be read together in determining whether there is a suitable available vacancy under Regulation 10(2). Judges: Ansell J Citations: [2010] UKEAT 0544 – 09 – 2708, [2011] ICR 75 Links: … Continue reading Simpson v Endsleigh Insurance Services Ltd and Others: EAT 27 Aug 2010
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Written particulars The Employment Tribunal made two mistakes of fact which made the Judgment perverse. It could not be said to be unarguably right, and so was remitted to a different Employment Tribunal. The right under Employment Rights Act 1996 s1 to written particulars … Continue reading Parfums Givenchy Ltd v Finch: EAT 30 Jul 2010
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularityEmployment Judge wrongly purported to decide a claim of unfair dismissal when she had no jurisdiction because sitting alone – Decision revoked on review – Same Judge chairs fresh (full) Tribunal – Application that she recuse herself dismissed.Held: Judge should have recused herself – There was … Continue reading Dorbcrest Homes Ltd v Fishwick: EAT 6 Jul 2010
EAT UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGESThe Claimant (who was a dentist) entered into a contract to provide dental services for the Respondent. The Employment Tribunal found that he was not an ’employee’ within the meaning of section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 but that he was a ‘worker’ within the meaning of that provision. … Continue reading Community Dental Centres Ltd v Sultan- Darmon: EAT 12 Aug 2010
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Working outside the jurisdiction The Claimants were wives of service personnel working at NATO headquarters in Belgium and in the Netherlands – Because of that status they were eligible for, and they obtained, employment in schools attached to those headquarters – They were dismissed when their husbands’ service came to an … Continue reading Ministry of Defence v Wallis and Another: EAT 30 Jul 2010
EAT TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGSEconomic technical or organisational reasonThe Employment Tribunal erred in taking into account a perceived breach of the consultation requirements of Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 regulation 13(6) in determining that the dismissals of two sample Claimants were unfair within the meaning of Employment Rights Act 1996 section 98(4). No … Continue reading Nationwide Building Society v Benn and Others: EAT 27 Jul 2010
Reason for dismissal must be assessed in context of the date notice given. Citations: Times 09-Jan-1997 Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 98 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Parkinson v March Consulting Ltd EAT 3-Oct-1994 . . Appeal from – Parkinson v March Consulting Ltd EAT 24-Jul-1995 . . Lists of cited by … Continue reading Parkinson v March Consulting Ltd: CA 9 Jan 1997
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Interim reliefExplanation of meaning of ‘likely’ given in Taplin v C Shippam Ltd [1978] IRLR 450 held not to have been invalidated by SCA Packaging Ltd v Boyle [2009] IRLR 746 and to represent the correct approach in applications under section 128 of Employment Rights Act 1996Observations on nature of evidence … Continue reading Dandpat v The University of Bath and Another: EAT 10 Nov 2009
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Worker, employee or neitherThe Claimant employee was given notice that his contract would expire on 1 December 2008.By a letter dated 26 November 2008 the Respondent employer informed the Claimant employee ‘I write to confirm that you can be released today and will still be paid up to and including your … Continue reading Wedgewood v Minstergate Hull Ltd: EAT 13 Jul 2010
The various insured defendants had been driven in the insured vehicles by a non-insured driver. Suffering injury at the negligence of the driver, they recovered variously damages. Their insurance companies sought recovery of the sums paid from their respective insureds under the policy terms, section 151 and under European law. Appeals and cross appeals were … Continue reading Churchill Insurance Company Ltd v Wilkinson and Others: CA 19 May 2010
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION: Protected disclosure The central question in this appeal was whether an employee/worker who complained of suffering a detriment from his current employer on the ground that he had made a protected disclosure could claim where that disclosure had been made not whilst employed by his current employer but whilst employed … Continue reading BP Plc v Elstone and Another: EAT 31 Mar 2010
The defendant implemented a voluntary retirement scheme under which benefits were calculated according to the period of service of the employee. The plaintiff claimed that the scheme discriminated against workers who had taken career breaks, and therefore against women. Held: A severance pay scheme, which calculated the amount payable according to length of service and … Continue reading Barry v Midland Bank Plc: HL 22 Jul 1999
The court was asked: ‘Was it unlawful for the Secretary of State for Health, the respondent, who had power to make provisions for the functioning of the National Health Service in England, to have failed to make a provision which would have enabled women who were citizens of the UK, but who were usually resident … Continue reading A and B, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health: SC 14 Jun 2017
EAT STATUTORY DISCIPLINE AND GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES:IMPACT ON COMPENSATIONThe Employment Tribunal took an irrelevant consideration into account when making an uplift under s31(3) of the Employment Rights Act 2002 and reducing a basic award under s112(5) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 when it took account of the death of the employer’s wife two years before … Continue reading Drewett v Penfold: EAT 7 Dec 2009
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reinstatement/Re-engagement Fingerprint officer found to have been unfairly dismissed. Tribunal ordered reinstatement to role of non-court going fingerprint officer. Appeal against order for reinstatement upheld and case remitted to a freshly constituted Tribunal to consider remedy including whether or not the dismissal was caused or contributed to by any action of … Continue reading Scottish Police Services Authority v McBride: EAT 30 Oct 2009
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION Whistleblowing Dismissal On an application for interim relief under sections 128-129 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 the Employment Judge erred in law in finding that such applications should be restricted to simple factual disputes. By doing so she added a requirement that had no statutory basis. Appeal allowed and remitted for … Continue reading Raja v The Secretary of State for Justice: EAT 15 Feb 2010
The claimant had been employed through an employment agency to carry out work for the respondent. He appealed against dismissal of his appeal against a ruling that he was not a worker for the respondent under the 1996 Act. He said that the Employment judge had not given him appropriate assistance as a litigant in … Continue reading Muschett v HM Prison Service: CA 2 Feb 2010
(Supreme Court of Canada) Human rights – Discrimination – Employment – Age – Law firm partnership agreement containing provision relating to retirement at age 65 – Equity partner filing complaint with Human Rights Tribunal arguing provision constituting age discrimination in employment – Whether equity partner engaged in ’employment relationship’ for purposes of Human Rights Code … Continue reading McCormick v Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP: 22 May 2014
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: CompensationIn accordance with Employment Rights Act 1996 Section 123(7) the excess of an enhanced redundancy payment over the amount of a basic award reduces the compensatory award arrived at in accordance with Section 123(1).The Employment Tribunal erred in deducting an enhanced redundancy payment twice. Once from loss of entitlement or potential entitlement … Continue reading MacCulloch v Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd: EAT 25 Nov 2009
EAT PRACTICE and PROCEDURECompromiseSection 203(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (‘ERA’) deems as void provisions, which preclude a party from bringing proceedings before an Employment Tribunal, save in respect of agreements which satisfy certain specific requirements, which are set out in section 203(3) of ERA. Does that Employment Tribunal have jurisdiction to determine whether … Continue reading Industrious Ltd v Horizon Recruitment Ltd and Another: EAT 11 Dec 2009
EAT Whether, and, if so, in what circumstances, a director and controlling shareholder of an insolvent company may recover from the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry payments in respect of debts falling within section 184 of the Employment Rights Act. Citations: [1997] UKEAT 516 – 97 – 1201, [1998] IRLR 120, [1998] ICR … Continue reading Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Bottrill: EAT 12 Jan 1997
The claimant worked for the local authority under a series of contracts. The employer denied that she had been continuously employed and there was no ‘irreducible minimum mutual obligation necessary to create a contract of service’. There were times when she had no work. Held: Given the authorities there was ample reason to find a … Continue reading Cornwall County Council v Prater: CA 24 Feb 2006
Tour guides were engaged to act ‘on a casual as required basis’. The guides later claimed to be employees and therefore entitled by statute to a written statement of their terms of employment. Their case was that an exchange of correspondence between the parties in March 1989 constituted a contract, which was to be classified … Continue reading Carmichael and Another v National Power Plc: HL 24 Jun 1999
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014
Solicitor Firm Member was a Protected Worker The solicitor appellant had been a member of the firm, a limited liability partnership. She disclosed criminal misbehaviour by a partner in a branch in Africa. On dismissal she sought protection as a whistleblower. This was rejected, it being found that a member of such a firm was … Continue reading Clyde and Co LLP and Another v van Winkelhof: SC 21 May 2014
The claimant sought to continue an interim injunction obtained without notice. The claimant sought to restrain former employees misusing information it claimed they had taken with them. The claimants said that having objected to a transfer of their employments they had not become employees of the claimant. Held: Where an employee did not know the … Continue reading New ISG Ltd v Vernon and others: ChD 14 Nov 2007
The plaintiff was a manager within the social services department. He suffered a mental breakdown in 1986, and had four months off work. His employers had refused to provide the increased support he requested. He had returned to work, but again, did not receive the staff or guidance to allow him to do the work … Continue reading Walker v Northumberland County Council: QBD 16 Nov 1994
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION: Protected disclosureThe claimant, who had less than one year’s continuous employment fell out with his fellow directors and equal shareholders. He was removed as a director. His solicitors wrote on his behalf stating that they had given advice to their client as a shareholder, director and employee. The Employment Tribunal erred in … Continue reading Cavendish Munro Professional Risks Management Ltd v Geduld (Rev 1): EAT 6 Aug 2009
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALS.98A(2) ERAPolkey deductionContributory faultThe Employment Tribunal erred when if found procedural defects in the investigation by the Respondent of the allegations of the Claimant’s misconduct. In any event it ought to have allowed evidence and considered Employment Rights Act 1996 s 98A(2).It wrongly awarded compensation beyond the 6 weeks it found it would … Continue reading Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust v Roldan: EAT 2 Sep 2009
The employer was in financial difficulties. A new company was formed by a customer to acquire its assets, and the employees, including the claimant were taken on by the new company. The claimant was dismissed within a year after. On claiming unfair dismissal, the new company said that he had no continuity of employment from … Continue reading Oakland v Wellswood (Yorkshire) Ltd: CA 30 Jul 2009
The claimant, a consultant surgeon had been subject to disciplinary proceedings by his employer. They were however conducted in a manner which breached his contract. The GMC had summarily dismissed the same allegations. The claimant now appealed against an award by the county court judge which had limited his damages to loss of earnings only. … Continue reading Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust: QBD 31 Jul 2009
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Striking-out/dismissalOn remission by the EAT, the Employment Tribunal did not err when it heard evidence and then struck out the Claimant’s claims of dismissal and detriment contrary to Employment Rights Act 1996 s 44, following her complaints about health and safety. It noted her related claims for andpound;20m against the Respondent … Continue reading Iya-Nya v British Airways Plc: EAT 19 Aug 2009
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATIONThe First Respondent was employed by the Second Respondent in security at the premises of the Appellant. The Appellant required the Second Respondent to remove the First Respondent after he was discovered making covert recordings of the Appellant’s staff. The Second Respondent did not have an alternative position for the First Respondent and … Continue reading Unilever UK Plc v Hickinson and Sodexo Limited: EAT 24 Jun 2009
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS: Worker, employee or neitherCONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT: Whether establishedREDUNDANCY: DefinitionPRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Split hearingsThe ET erred in holding that contracts for the employment of a locum consultant entered into in breach of the National Health Service (Appointment of Consultants) Regulations 1996 as amended were not ultra vires. However the ET did not err … Continue reading Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust v Lairikyengbam: EAT 21 Aug 2009
The various claimants sought to challenge the 2004 Act by way of judicial review on the grounds that it was ‘a disproportionate, unnecessary and illegitimate interference with their rights to choose how they conduct their lives, and with market freedoms protected by European law; and an unjust interference with economic rights.’ Held: ‘We have concluded … Continue reading Countryside Alliance and others v HM Attorney General and others: Admn 29 Jul 2005
EAT Jurisdictional Points
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularityUNFAIR DISMISSAL: Reasonableness of dismissalAppeal allowed. The Tribunal erred in law in its approach to the questions to be determined for the purposes of section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, effectively substituting its own views. The Tribunal did not, however, evince apparent bias. Citations: [2009] … Continue reading Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc v Wilson: EAT 24 Jun 2009
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION: Whistleblowing Appellant raised concerns with employer about immigration status of staff and students, and other alleged irregularities – Dismissed shortly afterwards – Claim of ‘ordinary’ unfair dismissal but also of detriment and dismissal for making a protected disclosure contrary to ss 47B and 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Held: (1) … Continue reading El-Megrisi v Azad University (Ir) In Oxford: EAT 5 May 2009
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Reasonableness of dismissalJURISDICTIONAL POINTS: 2002 Act and pre-action requiments The Employment Tribunal conflated the requirements placed on employers under Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Employment Act 2002 with the duty to conduct a fair and proper disciplinary process. The statute placed minimum requirements only on employers; the sanction for failure … Continue reading Johns v ISS Mediclean Ltd: EAT 27 Jan 2009
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL Dismissal/ambiguous resignation Whether Claimant dismissed under s95(1)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996. Security guard removed from site. Attempts to find alternative work. No pay in the meantime. No actual dismissal – Appeal allowed. Judges: Peter Clark J Citations: [2010] UKEAT 0067 – 10 – 0605 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 95(1)(a) … Continue reading Mitie Security (London) Ltd v Ibrahim: EAT 6 May 2010
Where the employer wrongly characterises the statutory reasons as one of conduct he is not prevented from relying on the correct statutory reason where the essential issues are known to both parties. The Tribunal was said to have alighted on a particular phrase in the letter of dismissal, which it construed, wrongly on the facts, … Continue reading Wilson v Post Office: CA 26 May 2000
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Constructive dismissal The Employment Tribunal did not approach the question of constructive unfair dismissal in a last straw case by reference to the steps in Omilaju. To take an analytic approach and ask of each event whether the Claimant had proved a breach or fundamental breach of contract was an error. Appeal … Continue reading Muschett v Parkwood Healthcare: EAT 16 Mar 2009
EAT UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGESUNFAIR DISMISSAL: Contributory fault / Polkey deductionThe Employment Tribunal erred in its finding as to the number of occasions on which the Appellant worked days in addition to Fridays and Saturdays. This error is likely to have led to a miscalculation of the number of hours worked each week and of … Continue reading Shirmardi v Capital Limo Ltd: EAT 15 Jan 2009
The employee had complained of her working conditions, particularly at having to work in an environment polluted by others smoking. Held: The correct term to be implied into her contract of employment to deal with the complaint in this case, is that the employer will provide and monitor for his employees, so far as is … Continue reading Waltons and Morse v Dorrington: EAT 19 May 1997
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Reasonableness of dismissal An Employment Tribunal erred as it focussed upon a decision made by the employer to negotiate a settlement under a procedure leading to a lesser penalty than dismissal. The procedure broke down and at a fair and reasonable hearing the disciplinary panel decided to dismiss the Claimant. The Employment … Continue reading West London Mental Health NHS Trust v Sarkar: EAT 27 Mar 2009