Varying contracts
In South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council v Graham, the EAT holds that a "local agreement", for the purposes of the National Joint Council for Local Government Employees' collective bargaining agreement, should be construed as meaning either an agreement by all the locally recognised trade unions, or an agreement that has been determined by a process agreed by all the recognised unions.
In Martin and others v South Bank University [2004] IRLR 74 ECJ, the European Court of Justice held that early retirement benefits should be paid for by a new employer after a transfer of undertakings.
In French v Barclays Bank plc, the Court of Appeal holds that a detrimental change in the terms on which a bridging loan was made to an employee who had been requested to relocate was a breach of the implied term of his contract of employment that the employer would not act so as to destroy the trust and confidence existing as between the employer and him.
In London Borough of Wandsworth v D'Silva and another, the Court of Appeal holds that provisions of a code of practice on sickness absence which an employer was seeking to amend unilaterally were not contractually binding on that employer.
In Jones v F Sirl & Son (Furnishers) Ltd [1997] IRLR 493 EAT, the EAT held that in deciding whether an employee left employment in consequence of a fundamental breach of contract by the employer, the industrial tribunal must determine whether the repudiatory breach was "the effective cause" of the resignation. It does not have to be the sole cause.
In (1) Wilson and others v St Helens Borough Council (2) Meade and another v British Fuels Ltd, the Court of Appeal considers the position under the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations where employees' contracts of employment are terminated on a relevant transfer and they accept employment with the transferee on less favourable terms and conditions.
The unilateral imposition of a continuous rolling shift pattern in place of the traditional shifts previously worked by employees in accordance with their contracts amounted to an express dismissal of those employees, who reserved their right to complain of unfair dismissal even though they worked under the new system, holds the EAT in Alcan Extrusions v Yates and others.
In Aparau v Iceland Frozen Foods plc the EAT overturns an industrial tribunal's decision that there was an express or implied term in an employee's contract of employment entitling the employer to move her, against her will, from one branch of its food stores to another.
In Wilson and others v St Helens Borough Council, the EAT holds that the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations prohibit even a consensual variation in the terms and conditions of employment of employees transferred where the transfer of the undertaking is the reason for the variation
An employee who agreed to relocate but later decided not to move was not dismissed by reason of redundancy, but rather because of his intention not to comply with the relocation clause in his contract, holds the EAT in Richardson and another v Applied Imaging International Ltd.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to varying contracts.