Employment law cases

All items: Dismissal

  • Contracts of employment: 'No compulsory redundancy' agreement merely aspirational

    Date:
    11 February 2005

    In Kaur v MG Rover Group Ltd, the Court of Appeal held that a provision in a collective agreement saying there would be no compulsory redundancies was no more than an aspirational statement and could not be incorporated into individual contracts of employment.

  • Disclosing misconduct

    Are employees, senior or otherwise, under a duty to disclose the misconduct of colleagues or themselves to their employer? Tony Thompson and Rebecca Peedell look at recent cases.

  • Constructive dismissal: Alleged pay rise promised at Christmas party not enforceable

    Date:
    14 January 2005

    In Judge v Crown Leisure Ltd, the EAT holds the tribunal did not err in law in deciding, as a matter of factual analysis, that a conversation between the applicant and his manager at a staff Christmas party did not amount to an enforceable promise to increase his pay, but were merely words of comfort.

  • Constructive dismissal: Last straw must contribute to breach of trust and confidence

    Date:
    24 December 2004

    In London Borough of Waltham Forest v Omilaju, the Court of Appeal holds that conduct by an employer amounting to the "last straw" for the purposes of a finding of constructive dismissal must be the last in a series of actions which cumulatively amount to a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence.

  • Fiduciary duties: Director's duty to disclose own misconduct

    Date:
    24 December 2004

    In Item Software (UK) Ltd v Fassihi and others the Court of Appeal holds that a company director has a fiduciary duty to disclose his own misconduct and to account for secret profits.

  • Fixed-term employees: Terminable contract still fixed-term

    Date:
    26 November 2004

    In Allen v National Australia Group Europe Ltd, the EAT holds that the tribunal was wrong to decline jurisdiction to hear a claim under the Fixed-term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002.

  • Unfair dismissal: Employers must take care in framing disciplinary charges

    Date:
    12 November 2004

    In Strouthos v London Underground Ltd the Court of Appeal holds that the EAT was incorrect to infer an employee's dishonesty from the facts found by the tribunal, when dishonesty had not been alleged in the original disciplinary proceedings.

  • Soteriou v Ultrachem Ltd and others

    Date:
    1 November 2004

    In Soteriou v Ultrachem Ltd and others [2004] IRLR 870 HC, the High Court held that the EAT had not erred in striking out the applicant's claim for wrongful dismissal on the basis that an employment tribunal had already determined on a claim for unfair dismissal that the applicant's contract of employment was unenforceable due to illegality and that, since the claim for wrongful dismissal involved the same contract, the EAT was bound by that finding.

  • Case round-up

    This week's case law round-up from Eversheds, covering pregnancy-related dismissals and transfers not covered by TUPE Regulations.

  • Damages: Pre-dismissal psychiatric injury claims can proceed

    Date:
    24 September 2004

    In Eastwood and another v Magnox Electric plc; McCabe v Cornwall County Council and others, the House of Lords holds that, in cases where psychiatric injury is alleged to have been caused by acts of the employer committed prior to, and separately from the act of dismissal itself, a cause of action will exist at common law for damages.

About this category

Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to dismissal.