The employment tribunal held that the claimant was fairly dismissed after making threats on Facebook to a colleague who had reported him to the employer for his frequent references to his workplace as "Dante's Inferno".
The Court of Appeal has held that an employer's decision to start a second set of disciplinary proceedings after an employee has already been disciplined for the same offence does not automatically render a subsequent dismissal unfair.
The Court of Appeal has reiterated the general principle that it is legitimate for an employer to take into account a prior final written warning when deciding to dismiss an employee, provided that the warning was issued in good faith and was not manifestly inappropriate.
The employment tribunal held that the claimant was unfairly dismissed for allegedly breaching the employer's policy prohibiting smoking in company vehicles.
This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, covers constructive dismissal where there was more than one possible reason for the individual's resignation.
In The Manchester College v Hazel and another EAT/0642/11 & EAT/0136/12, the EAT upheld a ruling by the employment tribunal that dismissals as a result of post-TUPE-transfer harmonisation were automatically unfair because they did not constitute an ETO reason "entailing changes in the workforce".
This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, covers whether or not the "Acas code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures" applied in a dismissal for a breakdown in trust and confidence.
In this case, the tribunal had to decide whether or not an employee was fairly dismissed for engaging in abusive and threatening behaviour during a heated meeting with his line manager.
This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, covers continuity of employment when an employee is dismissed, but re-employed almost immediately by the same company.