Dismissal
In Scotch Premier Meat Ltd v Burns and others [2000] IRLR 639 EAT, the EAT held that an employment tribunal had not erred in holding that the employers were "proposing to dismiss as redundant 20 or more employees" within the meaning of s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act, notwithstanding that, as an alternative option, they were considering selling the business as a going concern.
Providing an employee's prospective employer with a reference that revealed several complaints made about the employee, of which she had been unaware, constituted a breach by her employer of the implied term of trust and confidence in her contract of employment, holds the EAT in TSB Bank plc v Harris.
In Midland Bank plc v Madden, the EAT holds that, while no court short of the Court of Appeal can discard the range or band of reasonable responses test as a determinative test, a tribunal is free to substitute its own views for those of the employer as to the reasonableness of dismissal as a response to the reason shown for it.
The principal reason for the dismissal of a transferor's employees, purportedly on the grounds of redundancy, was the impending transfer of the undertaking, holds the EAT in Kerry Foods Ltd v Creber and others.
In Harvest Press Ltd v McCaffrey [1999] IRLR 778 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that if an employee is dismissed after walking out of work because of bullying or harassment by a colleague, he or she may be protected by the health and safety provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and therefore regarded as automatically unfairly dismissed.
In Murray and another v Foyle Meats Ltd, the House of Lords holds that the language of the statutory definition of redundancy asks two questions of fact. The first is whether or not one or other of various states of economic affairs exists, and the second is whether or not the dismissal is attributable, wholly or mainly, to that state of affairs.
Damages for wrongful dismissal may in principle include damages in respect of an employee's loss of the opportunity to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, holds the EAT in Raspin v United News Shops Ltd.
In Francisco HernandezVidal SA v Gomez Perez and others [1999] IRLR 132 ECJ, the European Court of Justice held that, for the purposes of EC Business Transfers Directive 77/187, an organised grouping of wage earners who are specifically and permanently assigned to a common task may, in the absence of other factors of production, amount to an economic entity.
In Hill v General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corporation plc, the Outer House of the Court of Session holds that there was no breach of the implied duty of mutual trust and confidence when an employer made an employee redundant while he was in receipt of contractual sick pay and had a prospective contractual entitlement to long-term sickness benefit.
Employees who are dismissed by the transferor of an undertaking, and then re-engaged by the transferee on different but agreed terms, are not entitled to retain the benefit of their previous terms of employment, holds the House of Lords in Wilson and others v St Helens Borough Council and Baxendale and Meade v British Fuels Ltd.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to dismissal.