A breach of contract by an employer failing to follow disciplinary procedure which leaves an employee unable to pursue claim for unfair dismissal, was remediable as a breach of contract by wrongful dismissal and damages accordingly. What must be compared for the purposes of assessing damages was the position in which the employee found herself when dismissed, at a date when she had no right to complain of unfair dismissal, with the position in which she would have found herself had she been dismissed on or after the date at which the right to bring such a complaint arose: ‘Once one makes that comparison then one is inevitably, in our view, and in a perfectly orthodox way, in a situation where chances have to be evaluated, because there is no certainty as to what would have happened had she still been employed on 16th May [when the statutory right would have accrued to her] but the possibilities are limited.’
Judges:
Judge Hicks QC
Citations:
Gazette 24-Mar-1999, [1999] IRLR 9
Citing:
Cited – Stapp v The Shaftesbury Society CA 1982
The employer had told the claimant: ‘I must ask you to relinquish your duties with effect from today 7 February 1981’ and thereby summarily dismissed him.
Held: The employer was clearly summarily dismissing with immediate effect in a wholly . .
Cited – Robert Court and Son Ltd v Charman EAT 1981
The EAT considered the effect of the statutory period of notice: ‘As a result, in our view Mr Charman has no right to complain to the Industrial Tribunal of unfair dismissal. Even if, as one must, one treats the effective date of termination as . .
Cited – Brindle v Smith CA 1972
A question arose as to the position of an employee wrongfully dismissed just before the end of his first 104 weeks of service where he would have qualified to have a right not to be unfairly dismissed if he had been given proper notice.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85671
