The council had dismissed all workers within a group of employees, and invited them to re-apply for their jobs. The council now appealed a protective award made on the basis that there had been inadequate consultation with the union.
Held: The court refused permission to raise a new point of law not argued below as to the relevence of European Law. Generally a new point will not be allowed to be advanced on appeal if it was not advanced below, but exceptionally a hard-edged question of law may be, but a case which requires further investigation by an Employment Tribunal would be most unlikely.
Judges:
Brooke LJ, Laws LJ, Scott Baker LJ
Citations:
[2006] EWCA Civ 825, [2006] IRLR 810, [2007] BLGR 208
Links:
Statutes:
Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 188
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Jones v Governing Body of Burdett Coutts School CA 2-Apr-1998
The Employment Appeal Tribunal must give reasons for its decision, if it chooses to allow the amendment of appeal the papers in order to hear a point of law which had been conceded in the industrial tribunal. Citing Liverpool Corporation v Wilson, . .
Cited – The Blackpool Fylde and Wyre Society for the Blind v Begg EAT 31-Mar-2005
EAT Practice and Procedure -and- Disability Discrimination
Appellant’s application to raise a new point on appeal (that the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 applies to Disability Discrimination . .
Cited – Junk v Kuhnel ECJ 27-Jan-2005
ECJ Social Policy – Directive 98/59/EC – Collective redundancies – Consultation with workers’ representatives – Notification to the competent public authority – Concept of ‘redundancy’ – Time at which redundancy . .
Cited – Yeboah v Crofton CA 31-May-2002
The industrial tribunal had made a finding of direct race discrimination. The Employment Appeal Tribunal found the decision perverse, and ordered a rehearing. The applicant appealed that order.
Held: The EAT must be careful not to take . .
Cited – Susie Radin Ltd v GMB and others CA 20-Feb-2004
The company made redundancies but failed to carry out any effective or honest consultation. The tribunal awarded the maximum 90 days protective order. The company appealed saying that it had given the employees greater notice than was strictly due. . .
Appeal from – Leicestershire County Council v Unison EAT 2-Sep-2005
EAT Redundancy: Protective Award
Employment Tribunal correctly applied the judgment in Susie Radin v GMB [2004] ICR 893 in its approach to the calculation of a protective award for one group of workers, . .
Cited by:
Cited – Swallow Security Services Ltd v Millicent EAT 19-Mar-2009
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Contributory fault
The employers dismissed the employee after a bogus redundancy exercise, after she had knowingly taken paid holiday in excess of her holiday allowance and failed to . .
Cited – Slack and Others v Cumbria County Council and Another CA 3-Apr-2009
The court was asked when the six month’s limit for beginning equal pay proceedings began. The new section 2ZA set the qualifying date as ‘the date falling six months after the last day on which the woman was employed in the employment.’ The problem . .
Cited – Clyde and Co Llp and Another v Bates van Winkelhof CA 26-Sep-2012
The claimant was a solicitor partner with the appellant limited liability partnership at their offices in Tanzania. She disclosed what she believed to be money laundering by a local partner. She was dismissed. She had just disclosed her pregnancy . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.242905