-
expand
Homewood v Ministry of Defence [1994] IT/1443/93
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Hooper v British Railways Board [1988] IRLR 517 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 1 December 1988
In Hooper v British Railways Board [1988] IRLR 517 CA, the Court of Appeal held that the terms of a negotiated agreement, which provided that a member of staff who was declared fit by his own doctor but did not meet the medical standards required by the Board's doctor "shall be paid the basic rate of pay appropriate to his grade until such time as he resumes work either in his own post or on other suitable work", meant that the employee had a contractual right to be kept on full pay until such time as he was redeployed or reached retirement age.
-
expand
Horkulak v Cantor Fitzgerald International [2004] IRLR 942 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 1 December 2004
In Horkulak v Cantor Fitzgerald International [2004] IRLR 942 CA, the Court of Appeal held that, even where the employment contract states that payment of a bonus is discretionary, the employer is under an implied duty to exercise that discretion genuinely and rationally, and a wrongfully dismissed employee could recover damages that reflect the bonus payments that he could have expected to receive had he remained in employment.
-
expand
Hörnfeldt v Posten Meddelande AB [2012] IRLR 785 ECJ
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Horton v Taplin Contracts Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1604
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 31 December 2002
In Horton v Taplin Contracts Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1604 CA, the Court of Appeal held that it is clear from the wording of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1992, regulation 5 that when an employer supplies work equipment it must be suitable in any respect that it is reasonably foreseeable will affect the health or safety of any person. In this case the unlawful actions of the claimant's work colleague were not foreseeable.
-
expand
Hospital Medical Group Ltd v Westwood [2012] IRLR 834 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Hounga v Allen and another [2012] IRLR 685 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Howard v Millrise Ltd t/a Colourflow (in liquidation) and another [2005] IRLR 84 EAT
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 14 January 2005
In Howard v (1) Millrise Ltd and another, the EAT holds that the correct interpretation of reg.10 (8A) of TUPE is that, if there is no trade union and no elected employee representatives, the employer is under a duty to inform and consult employees affected by the transfer of the undertaking.
-
expand
Howard v Ministry of Defence [1994] IT/30051/94
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 1 March 1995
The exception to the temporal limitation in the Barber decision in respect of workers who have already brought legal proceedings "or made an equivalent claim" only applies where the claim had been made to an independent third party with power to make a determination, holds a Bristol industrial tribunal (Chair: C G Toomer) in Howard v Ministry of Defence.
-
expand
Howman & Son v Blyth [1983] IRLR 139 EAT
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 5 April 1983
Where a contract of employment does not specify a limit to the duration of sick pay, it does not continue indefinitely but only for a reasonable period, holds the EAT, in Howman & Son v Blyth. However in deciding what is a reasonable period, Tribunals should consider the limit specified in a national agreement in the relevant industry.