-
- Date:
- 15 August 1997
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In (1) Wilson and others v St Helens Borough Council (2) Meade and another v British Fuels Ltd, the Court of Appeal considers the position under the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations where employees' contracts of employment are terminated on a relevant transfer and they accept employment with the transferee on less favourable terms and conditions.
-
- Date:
- 1 August 1996
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The unilateral imposition of a continuous rolling shift pattern in place of the traditional shifts previously worked by employees in accordance with their contracts amounted to an express dismissal of those employees, who reserved their right to complain of unfair dismissal even though they worked under the new system, holds the EAT in Alcan Extrusions v Yates and others.
-
- Date:
- 15 June 1996
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Aparau v Iceland Frozen Foods plc the EAT overturns an industrial tribunal's decision that there was an express or implied term in an employee's contract of employment entitling the employer to move her, against her will, from one branch of its food stores to another.
-
- Date:
- 1 May 1996
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Wilson and others v St Helens Borough Council, the EAT holds that the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations prohibit even a consensual variation in the terms and conditions of employment of employees transferred where the transfer of the undertaking is the reason for the variation
-
- Date:
- 1 February 1995
- Type:
- Employment law cases
An employee who agreed to relocate but later decided not to move was not dismissed by reason of redundancy, but rather because of his intention not to comply with the relocation clause in his contract, holds the EAT in Richardson and another v Applied Imaging International Ltd.
-
- Date:
- 1 July 1994
- Type:
- Employment law cases
An industrial tribunal's decision that an employee could reasonably refuse a proposed detrimental variation in contractual terms because it was not based on sound business reasons vital for the company's survival was wrong, holds the EAT in Catamaran Cruisers Ltd v Williams and others.
-
- Date:
- 1 March 1993
- Type:
- Employment law cases
An employer had no right to withdraw unilaterally its employees' contractual entitlement to enhanced redundancy payments, holds the High Court in Lee and others v GEC Plessey Telecommunications.
-
- Date:
- 17 April 1984
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The introduction of new technology raises issues of working practices and contractual rights. In Cresswell and others v Board of Inland Revenue, the High Court holds that the computerisation of PAYE did not change the contracts of Inland Revenue staff.
-
- Date:
- 1 April 1982
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Evans v Elemeta Holdings Ltd [1982] IRLR 143 EAT, the EAT emphasises that whether it is reasonable to dismiss an employee for refusing to accept a change in contractual terms depends upon whether it was reasonable for the employee to decline the terms. If it was reasonable for the employee to decline those terms, then it is unreasonable for the employer to dismiss the employee for such refusal.
-
- Date:
- 1 August 1980
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Genower v Ealing, Hammersmith & Hounslow Area Health Authority [1980] IRLR 297 EAT, the EAT held that the attempt by the respondent employers to change the appellant's job duties and place of work following a reorganisation, albeit a breach of contract which justified him in resigning and claiming that he had been dismissed within the meaning of the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act, section 55(2)(c), was a dismissal for some other substantial reason and was reasonable in all the circumstances.