End of employment
An industrial tribunal was entitled to exercise its discretion to extend the time limit for unfair dismissal applications from redundant employees, who mistakenly believed that work would "pick up"; and they would be re-employed, until two weeks after the employer's business closed down.
If an employer cannot determine which individual(s), out of a group of possible culprits, are guilty of dishonesty, it may decide to dismiss them all. In Parr v Whitbread plc t/a Threshers Wine Merchants, the EAT holds that such dismissals may be fair, as long as certain criteria are met.
The High Court's decision in Micklefield v SAC Technology Ltd illustrates how employees' rights under employee share option schemes can be affected by the termination of their employment.
Where an employee is wrongfully dismissed, any outstanding contractual obligations of the injured employee are extinguished upon the ending of the employment contract, holds the High Court in Briggs v Oates.
The doctrine of frustration should be severely limited in its scope when applied to employment contracts says the EAT in Williams v Watsons Luxury Coaches Ltd.
In Catherine Haigh Harlequin Hair Design v Seed the EAT holds that in order for an employee to be able to complain that the written reasons for dismissal given to her by her employer were "inadequate or untrue", those reasons must have been furnished in response to a specific request from the employee in question.
In Prestwick Circuits Ltd v McAndrew [1990] IRLR 191 CS, the Court of Session held that the implied right to order a transfer from one place of employment to another must be subject to the implied qualification that reasonable notice must be given in all the circumstances of the case.
It was not unfair for a local education authority to dismiss three lecturers for redundancy without reference to their college's governors, even though their lecturers' contracts of employment contemplated that the governors would decide whether to dismiss.
A unilateral increase in hours of work without consultation constituted a breach of contract entitling employees to resign and claim constructive dismissal, the EAT holds in Humphreys & Glasgow Ltd v Broom and Holt*.
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.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to the end of employment.