In Thompson v Informatica Software Ltd, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the employee's dismissal for authorising the cost of a golf trip for a customer, in breach of the employer's anti-corruption policy, was fair.
We look at four employment tribunal cases in which the claimants argued that their employer's failure to make better use of the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme rendered their dismissal unfair.
We round up four recent employment tribunal decisions where employers' actions have resulted in pregnancy and maternity discrimination claims and provide practical tips on how to reduce the risks of similar claims.
In Henderson v AccountsNet Ltd, the employment tribunal awarded £13,081 to a trainee accountant who was found to have been unfairly dismissed after she left the office to collect her ill child from school.
In Gwynedd Council v Barratt and another, the Court of Appeal held that the absence of an appeal in a redundancy process is one of many factors in determining the fairness of the dismissal.
In Bayfield and another v Wunderman Thompson (UK) Ltd and others, an employment tribunal upheld the sex discrimination and unfair dismissal claims of two male directors who were dismissed after the advertising agency vowed to "obliterate" its reputation as a "Knightsbridge boys club".
With coronavirus-related employment tribunal rulings now appearing regularly, we examine four early examples of first-instance decisions where an employer dismissed an employee who refused, or was reluctant, to attend work because of health and safety concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In Northbay Pelagic Ltd v Anderson, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the employer's decision to dismiss an employee for installing a surveillance camera at work was unfair.
In Kubilius v Kent Foods Ltd, an employment tribunal held that the delivery driver was fairly dismissed when he refused to wear a face mask at a client site.