In Atherton v Bensons Vending Ltd, an employment tribunal held that a small employer fairly dismissed an employee who made a personal attack on the managing director on Facebook. However, the claimant's wrongful dismissal was upheld because the employer could not show that his behaviour was so serious that it was entitled to dismiss him without notice pay.
In Wilko Retail Ltd v Gaskell and another, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that an employment tribunal applied the wrong approach when assessing the reasonableness of the employer's decision to dismiss two employees for breaching its signing in and out policy.
In Governing Body of Tywyn Primary School v Aplin, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) upheld a headteacher's constructive dismissal and sexual orientation discrimination claims after his school mishandled disciplinary action over his lawful sexual activities with two 17-year-olds he met through Grindr.
In Elliott v RMS Cash Solutions Ltd, a Northern Ireland tribunal held that a cash transit firm fairly dismissed an employee whose Snapchat posts revealed a colleague's personal details. The posts increased the risk of "tiger kidnapping", which involves staff or their families being kidnapped to force staff to help commit a crime.
In Hare Wines Ltd v Kaur and another, the Court of Appeal upheld the tribunal's decision that the employee's dismissal was automatically unfair by reason of a TUPE transfer because the employer had not taken action to resolve her poor working relationships prior to the transfer, but did so by dismissing her at the time of the transfer.
In London Borough of Lambeth v Agoreyo, the Court of Appeal held that the proper test for the courts for deciding if an employee's suspension breached the implied term of trust and confidence is whether or not the employer's decision to suspend was a "reasonable and proper" response to the allegations.
In Asda Stores Ltd v Raymond, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) upheld the tribunal decision that the employer's failure to conduct a reasonable investigation and to take reasonable care during the disciplinary process made the employee's dismissal unfair. The EAT also upheld the tribunal's ruling that his dismissal arose from his disability.
In Awan v ICTS UK Ltd, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that an implied term of the contract of employment prohibited the employer from dismissing the employee for medical capability while he was entitled to receive long-term disability benefits.
In George v London Borough of Brent, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that the employer's failure to comply with a contractual obligation to offer a redundant employee a trial period for a possible alternative role was likely to render the dismissal unfair.
In Hawkes v Ausin Group (UK) Ltd, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that the employer's failure to hold a meeting with a reservist employee, before making the decision to dismiss, did not make the dismissal for some other substantial reason unfair.