Sandhu and Others v Gate Gourmet London Ltd: EAT 17 Jul 2009

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL
Exclusions including worker / jurisdiction
Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissal
Reasonableness of dismissal
Six conjoined appeals by employees dismissed during the Gate Gourmet dispute and in respect of whom the Tribunal had found either that they were dismissed while taking part in unofficial industrial action, so that it had no jurisdiction pursuant to s.237(1) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, or that the dismissals were fair.
Sandhu
(1) Decision that Claimant, a union official, was dismissed while taking part in industrial action not inconsistent with the previous decision of the Tribunal that the action was unofficial
(2) Employment Judge entitled to decline a review where she was able to correct an error in the Reasons by reference to findings already made
(3) Although Claimant had initially attended the site as a trade union official to assist in resolving the dispute and would not be regarded as taking part in industrial action if that had remained his role, Tribunal entitled to find that he was no longer acting in that capacity at time of dismissal.
Singh
Same point as Sandhu (3) (above).
Mathew
Tribunal entitled to find that procedurally and substantively fair to dismiss employee who employer reasonably believed had been taking part in industrial action when he tried to return to work – Observations on application of Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004 in such circumstances and the effect of Simmons v. Hoover [1977] ICR 61
Dhillon
Tribunal entitled to find that dismissal without hearing of Claimant who was absent during the industrial action without authorisation or explanation was procedurally and substantially fair: cf. Mathew (above).
Begum
Tribunal entitled to find dismissal of Claimant for two weeks unauthorised and unexplained absence fair despite mishandling of the procedures.
Sehmi
Finding that Claimant was participating in industrial action at moment that he received letter of dismissal meant that Tribunal had no jurisdiction, notwithstanding that he had not been so participating when the letter was sent.

Judges:

Underhill P J

Citations:

[2009] UKEAT 0264 – 08 – 1707, [2009] IRLR 807

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 237(1)

Employment

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.392521