End of employment

New and updated

• Date:

  15 June 1996

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Misconduct: Aggravating factors justified disparity of treatment

  An employee was fairly dismissed for misconduct even though another employee who was guilty of the same conduct was treated differently and given a final written warning, holds the EAT in London Borough of Harrow v Cunningham.

• Date:

  15 April 1996

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Redundancy consultation: Definition of "establishment" under Collective Redundancies Directive

  An "establishment" for the purposes of the EC Collective Redundancies Directive means the unit to which the workers made redundant are assigned to carry out their duties, rules the ECJ in Rockfon A/S v Specialarbejderforbundet i Danmark.

• Date:

  31 December 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Steelprint Ltd v Haynes

  In Steelprint Ltd v Haynes EAT/467/95, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the dismissal of an employee after the employer had restructured her job but failed to provide training in the new skills required was unfair.

• Date:

  1 November 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Trade union activities: Consent to recruit members did not bar criticism of employer

  In Bass Taverns Ltd v Burgess, the Court of Appeal holds that a shop steward who resigned after he was demoted for making disparaging remarks about the employer to trainee managers was unfairly constructively dismissed for taking part in trade union activities at an appropriate time.

• Date:

  1 November 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Misconduct: Dismissal of abusive employees was fair

  An employer's decision to dismiss three employees who became drunk, abusive and violent after a seminar aimed at improving their "behavioural skills" was manifestly reasonable, holds the EAT in Whitbread Beer Company v Williams and others.

• Date:

  1 July 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Redundancy: Discovery of assessment forms must relate to issues raised

  In British Aerospace plc v Green, the Court of Appeal considers the guiding principles for ordering discovery of marked assessment forms in cases where redundant employees claim that they were unfairly selected.

• Date:

  1 June 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Misconduct: Inconsistent treatment not established

  An industrial tribunal was not entitled to find that allegedly inconsistent treatment of employees rendered a dismissal for misconduct unfair, holds the Court of Appeal in Paul v East Surrey District Health Authority.

• Date:

  1 May 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Unfair dismissal: Dismissal of competing employee was fair

  An employer is entitled to expect that an employee will not compete with it for contracts with existing customers, holds the EAT in Adamson v B&L Cleaning Services Ltd.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Narrow interpretation for new safety rights

  In Baddeley v Mehta t/a Supascoop, an industrial tribunal holds that a new right to claim unfair dismissal on grounds of health and safety does not apply to an employee who had resigned.

• Date:

  1 March 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Identified for redundancy because of IVF absence

  A woman whose absence resulting from IVF treatment was treated as part of her sickness record for redundancy purposes was unlawfully discriminated against on the grounds of sex, rules an Ashford industrial tribunal (Chair: G W Davies) in Robinson v London Borough of Greenwich.