Employment law cases

All items: End of employment

  • Massey v Crown Life Insurance Co

    Date:
    1 January 1978

    In Massey v Crown Life Insurance Co [1978] IRLR 31 CA, the Court of Appeal held that, whilst the parties to a contract cannot alter the truth of their relationship by putting a different label upon it, when it is ambiguous as to whether the employment is under a contract of employment or a contract for services, the terms of an agreement between the parties may be decisive as to what is the legal relationship.

  • Unfair dismissal: When an employee may not be entitled to a second chance

    Date:
    22 October 1977

    In Taylor v Alidair Ltd, the Appeal Court upholds a finding by the Employment Appeal Tribunal that it was not unfair to dismiss a pilot on the basis of a single error of judgement. And in Retarded Children's Aid Society Ltd v Day, it holds that the Code of Practice notwithstanding, in some cases it may be reasonable to dismiss without giving the employee a second chance, "especially with a man who is determined to go on in his own way".

  • Unfair dismissal: Different standard of fairness for temporary employees

    Date:
    1 October 1977

    When the fixed term contract of a temporary employee expires without being renewed, the test of fairness may be less stringent than would be adopted for an employee whose status was not seen from the start as temporary. This is one of the points to emerge from Gwent County Council v Lane and Terry v East Sussex County Council.

  • LM Boychuk v HJ Symons Holdings Ltd

    Date:
    1 October 1977

    In LM Boychuk v HJ Symons Holdings Ltd [1977] IRLR 395 EAT, the EAT held that an employee who insisted on wearing a "Lesbians Ignite" badge was fairly dismissed because the employer asserted that the badge could cause offence to fellow employees and customers.

  • Unfair dismissal: Evidence discovered after dismissal

    Date:
    1 September 1977

    In Devis & Sons v Atkins, the House of Lords rules that whether a dismissal is unfair must be judged according to the facts which the employer knew or should have known at the time the decision to dismiss was taken.

  • Unfair dismissal: Failure to follow a correct procedure

    Date:
    15 August 1977

    In Mansfield Hosiery Mills Lid v Bromley, the EAT emphasises that it is only in exceptional cases that a failure to follow a correct procedure will not result in a finding of unfair dismissal.

  • The Post Office v PA Mughal

    Date:
    1 May 1977

    In Post Office v PA Mughal [1977] IRLR 178 EAT, the EAT established that the general test of fairness in dismissing a probationary employee is whether the employer took reasonable steps to maintain appraisal of the probationer throughout the probationary period, giving guidance by advice or warning, and whether an honest effort was made to determine whether he or she came up to the required standard.

  • East Lindsey District Council v G E Daubney

    Date:
    1 May 1977

    In East Lindsey District Council v G E Daubney [1977] IRLR 181 EAT, the EAT held that a failure to investigate an employee's medical condition and prognosis prior to dismissal for capability would normally result in unfair dismissal.

  • CA Treganowan v Robert Knee & Co Ltd

    Date:
    1 August 1975

    In C A Treganowan v Robert Knee & Co Ltd [1975] IRLR 247 HC, the High Court held that a clash of personalities between employees constitutes "another substantial reason" for dismissal within the meaning of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1992.

  • S Futty v Brekkes (D & D) Ltd

    Date:
    1 May 1974

    In S Futty v Brekkes (D & D) Ltd [1974] IRLR 130 IT, the Industrial Tribunal held that an off-the-cuff remark by a foreman to an employee that if he didn't like his job he could leave had its own particular meaning in the fish trade and could not be held to constitute a dismissal.

About this category

Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to the end of employment.