End of employment

New and updated

• Date:

  28 June 2010

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Whistleblowing: Opinion on discretionary redundancy scheme not protected disclosure

  In Goode v Marks & Spencer plc EAT/0442/09, the EAT held that an employment tribunal was right to find that an employee had not been dismissed because of having made a protected disclosure. There had been no qualifying or protected disclosure, but merely an opinion expressed about the employer's proposal for changes to a discretionary enhanced redundancy scheme.

• Type:

  How to

  How to deal with a fixed-term contract that comes to an end

  Practical guidance on dealing with the end of a fixed-term contract, including redundancy as a reason for dismissal; and successive fixed-term contracts.

• Date:

  21 June 2010

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Conditional resignation does not trigger effective date of termination

  The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that the date of a conditional resignation cannot constitute the effective date of termination regardless of any agreement between the employer and employee. 

• Date:

  14 June 2010

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Redundancy: Customer request did not justify failure to consult

  In Shanahan Engineering v Unite the Union EAT/0411/09, the EAT held that an employment tribunal was right to find that, in relation to collective redundancy consultation, although a customer's instruction amounted to "special circumstances", absolving the employer of the need to start consultation 30 days in advance of the first redundancy, it did not absolve it of all obligations to consult. However, the tribunal should have taken into account the special circumstances of the case in setting the level of the protective award.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Case round-up

  Helen Samuel, associate solicitor and Anna Bridges, associate solicitor, at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.

• Date:

  1 June 2010

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Unfair dismissal: Failure properly to consider explanation of uncharacteristic behaviour during hypoglycaemic episode resulted in unfair dismissal

  In City of Edinburgh Council v Dickson EATS/0038/09, the EAT upheld the employment tribunal's decision that an employee whose employer failed properly to consider his explanation that he had behaved out of character during a hypoglycaemic episode was unfairly dismissed. However, the tribunal's conclusion that the employer's rejection of that explanation amounted to direct and disability-related discrimination was wrong in law and was overturned.

• Type:

  FAQs

  Are there any possible repercussions for an employer that persuades an employee who has resigned and accepted an offer with another employer to stay?

• Date:

  19 May 2010

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Unfair dismissal: Dismissal for gross misconduct fell outside range of reasonable responses

  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.

• Date:

  19 May 2010

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Age discrimination: Age-related notice periods are discriminatory

  In Kücükdeveci v Swedex GmbH & Co KG [2010] IRLR 346 ECJ, the ECJ held that German law that excludes employment below the age of 25 when calculating minimum statutory notice periods based on length of service amounts to unjustified age discrimination contrary to the Equal Treatment Framework Directive.

• Type:

  FAQs

  If an employee does not return from maternity leave, does the employer have to pay them in lieu of the annual leave that they accrued during maternity leave?