-
expand
Scottbridge Construction Ltd v Wright [2003] IRLR 21 CS
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 21 March 2003
In Scottbridge Construction Ltd v Wright the Court of Session upholds the EAT's decision that a "nightwatchman" who was required to be on his employer's premises for 14 hours each night was entitled to be paid the national minimum wage in respect of all those hours, even though, while required to respond to an alarm at any time, he only had to undertake specific tasks that took around four hours a night, and was permitted to sleep if he chose to when not carrying out those tasks.
-
expand
Scottish and Southern Energy plc v Mackay EATS/0075/06
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 18 December 2007
In Scottish and Southern Energy plc v Mackay EATS/0075/06, the EAT held that failure by an employer to consult directly with a disabled employee about the possibility of his taking up less-stressful alternative work rendered the employee's subsequent dismissal unfair, but did not in itself amount to a failure by the employer to make reasonable adjustments.
-
expand
Scotts Company (UK) Ltd v Budd [2003] IRLR 145 EAT
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 4 April 2003
In Scotts Company (UK) Ltd v Budd, the EAT holds that an employee who had exhausted his contractual entitlement to sick pay, and had remained on unpaid sick leave for a year before he was dismissed, was not entitled to a week's pay for each week of his statutory minimum notice period.
-
expand
Secretary Of State For Business, Enterprise And Regulatory Reform v Neufeld and another [2009] IRLR 475 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Secretary of State for Employment v ASLEF (No 2) [1972] 2 All ER 949 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 31 December 1972
In Secretary of State for Employment v ASLEF (No 2) [1972] 2 All ER 949 CA, the Court of Appeal held that works rules or job descriptions are not of themselves contractual. They are guides as to the way in which work should be performed and should be interpreted in a reasonable way. If interpreted in an unreasonable way in order to disrupt employment this will be breach of contract.
-
expand
Secretary of State for Justice v Mansfield EAT/0539/09
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Secretary of State for Scotland v Taylor [1997] IRLR 608 EAT
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 15 November 1997
An employer did not act in fundamental breach of an employee's contract of employment when it required him to retire at the age of 55, in accordance with its retirement policy aimed at achieving a younger workforce, even though the contract incorporated an equal opportunities policy containing an express commitment to offer equal opportunities regardless of age, rules the EAT in Secretary of State for Scotland v Taylor.
-
expand
Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Bottrill [1999] IRLR 326 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Slater and others [2007] IRLR 928 EAT
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes (a partnership) [2012] IRLR 590 SC
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 26 April 2012
The Supreme Court has provided guidance on the components needed to justify a compulsory retirement age, stressing that the chosen retirement age has to be appropriate and necessary in that particular business. It went on to say that, once a retirement age is justified for a workplace or group of workers, the employer does not have to justify every retirement on an individual basis.