-
- Type:
- FAQs
-
- Date:
- 24 September 2004
- Type:
- Employment law cases
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.
-
- Date:
- 24 September 2004
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Dunnachie v Kingston-upon-Hull City Council, the House of Lords holds that Lord Hoffman's comments in Johnson were obiter and, therefore, did not prevent the House of Lords from finding that unfair dismissal compensation should be restricted to economic losses only.
-
- Date:
- 3 September 2004
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Street v Derbyshire Unemployed Workers' Centre, the Court of Appeal holds that an employment tribunal had been correct to find that an employee's "whistleblowing" disclosure was not made in good faith because, although she believed her allegations to be true and did not make the disclosure for personal gain, her motivation for making it was personal antagonism towards the subject of the disclosure.
-
- Date:
- 1 September 2004
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Nottinghamshire County Council v Meikle [2004] IRLR 703 CA, the Court of Appeal held that putting an employee who was off sick for a disability-related reason on to half pay after a period of full pay was unjustified less favourable treatment where the employer had failed to make reasonable adjustments, which, had they been made, would have resulted in the employee's returning to work before she became liable to have her sick pay reduced.
-
- Type:
- FAQs
-
- Type:
- Letters and forms
A model letter to an employee who is resigning agreeing to release them from the requirement to serve out their full notice period.
-
- Date:
- 1 June 2004
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Susie Radin v GMB and others [2004] IRLR 400 CA, the Court of Appeal held that the employment tribunal had not erred in making a protective award for the maximum period of 90 days in respect of the employers' failure to consult with the union over a proposal to close a factory and dismiss all employees as redundant, notwithstanding the tribunal's finding in relation to the employees' claims of unfair dismissal that, in those circumstances, consultation would have been futile.
-
- Date:
- 1 June 2004
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Hardy v Polk (Leeds) Ltd [2004] IRLR 420 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that an employee who is dismissed without notice or pay in lieu of notice is under a duty to mitigate his or her loss in respect of the notice period, and that earnings received from another employer during the (nominal) notice period must be offset against the compensatory award.
-
- Date:
- 21 May 2004
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Harper v Virgin Net Ltd the Court of Appeal holds under s.97(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, where an employee is summarily dismissed, that employee's effective date of termination ("EDT") is only extended to the end of the statutory notice period to which he or she would have been entitled, and not to the end of their contractual notice period.