-
- Date:
- 24 August 2011
- Type:
- Employment law cases
This article summarises the main issues and outcomes in five employment tribunal cases where the key issue was whether the employee resigned or was dismissed.
-
- Date:
- 23 August 2011
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has upheld the employment tribunal decision that a former NHS trust chief executive was automatically unfairly dismissed for making a protected disclosure.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
As this case shows, it is not always fair to dismiss an employee for attending work under the influence of alcohol.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The employer in this case had a laudable zero-tolerance policy on racism, but failed to take a common-sense view of the background to an accusation that a manager had made a racist comment.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The employer in this case fairly dismissed an employee who lost his driving licence, even though there was not an express requirement in his contract of employment that he be able to drive.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, covers constructive dismissal.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In this case, a small employer's careful disciplinary investigation, using CCTV footage, led to the successful defence of an unfair dismissal claim.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
This is a rare instance, along with the decision in Barlow v Ranc Care Homes Ltd ET/1101527/10, of an employment tribunal ordering an employer to reinstate an unfairly dismissed employee.
-
- Date:
- 1 August 2011
- Type:
- Employment law cases
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that a worker absent for the whole leave year, but who does not submit a request for the annual leave before the leave year ends, does not forfeit his or her entitlement to paid annual leave.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Employment tribunals do not have to delve too deeply into the reasons why an earlier warning was issued when an employee is later dismissed for further misconduct or poor performance while that warning is still live, as we can see from this judgment. They need to look behind the original warning only in exceptional circumstances, for example where there is evidence that it was issued in bad faith.