Unfair dismissal
In Sarkar v West London Mental Health NHS Trust [2010] EWCA Civ 289 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an employment tribunal was entitled to find that the employer had acted outside the range of reasonable responses when it summarily dismissed an employee for gross misconduct after initial agreement that the allegations against him would be dealt with under an informal procedure that was appropriate for relatively minor misconduct and could not lead to dismissal.
In Buckland v Bournemouth University Higher Education Corporation [2010] EWCA Civ 121 CA, the Court of Appeal held that the "range of reasonable responses" test has no place in a tribunal's determination of whether or not there was a repudiatory breach of contract by the employer and constructive dismissal. It also held that such a breach cannot be "cured", so as to prevent the innocent party accepting the breach.
Richard Ryan, associate, Helen Ward, associate, and Tori O'Neil, trainee solicitor, Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that it will only rarely be unfair for an employer to proceed with a disciplinary hearing prior to holding a related grievance appeal hearing.
In Lyons v Mitie Security Ltd EAT/0081/09, the EAT held that, in principle, the ability to take annual leave is not inalienable and can be lost if the worker does not comply with the notice requirements imposed by the Working Time Regulations 1998 and/or the worker's contract. However, the tribunal had erred in failing to analyse properly whether or not the particular notice requirements of the claimant's contract had been complied with, before deciding to dismiss his constructive dismissal and holiday pay claims.
In this case, an employee was fairly dismissed for disclosing details of job applicant.
Susannah Jarvis (associate) and Kate Williams (professional support lawyer), Addleshaw Goddard, analyse important recent rulings.
The Court of Appeal has held that an employee who was employed under a series of fixed-term contracts and whose contract was terminated could bring a claim of unfair dismissal despite the fact that he was employed to work outside Great Britain. Territorial limitations to unfair dismissal rights should be modified where necessary to enable a right emanating from European law to be enforced.
In Cavendish Munro Professional Risks Management Ltd v Geduld [2010] IRLR 38 EAT, the EAT held that the employment tribunal erred in deciding that a solicitor's letter amounted to a qualifying disclosure for the purposes of s.43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The letter merely stated the employee's position in an ongoing dispute, without alleging any facts.
In Stuart Peters Ltd v Bell [2009] IRLR 941 CA, the Court of Appeal held that, in a case of constructive unfair dismissal, the Norton Tool principle that compensation for unfair dismissal without notice must include a sum representing the employee's full pay during his or her notice period does not apply, and the employee must give credit for any earnings during this period.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to unfair dismissal.