EAT The claimant, a university lecturer, claimed that he had been unfairly constructively dismissed. The tribunal held that the university had acted reasonably throughout the period of his employment, that they had not breached his contract in any respect and that he had not, in any event, resigned due to what he perceived to be their breach of contract. The EAT dismissed an appeal based on grounds that they had misapplied and misunderstood the test for constructive dismissal, that they ought to have applied the principle in Peyman v Lanjani [1985] C.L. 457, that their decision was perverse and that they had failed to take account of relevant evidence. Observations made to the effect that Peyman did not apply in the employment law field.
Judges:
The Honourable Lady Smith
Citations:
[2006] UKEAT 0025 – 05 – 0908, UKEATS/0025/05/RN
Links:
Citing:
Cited – London Borough of Waltham Forest v Omilaju CA 11-Nov-2004
Final Straw Act – Non-Trivial
The claimant had been involved in protracted disputes with the respondent. The respondent appealed a finding of constructive dismissal and victimisation. He had attended a tribunal hearing and the employer had refused to pay his salary whilst he was . .
Cited – Dr Anya v University of Oxford and Another CA 22-Mar-2001
Discrimination – History of interactions relevant
When a tribunal considered whether the motive for an act was discriminatory, it should look not just at the act, but should make allowance for earlier acts which might throw more light on the act in question. The Tribunal should assess the totality . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.244572
