Dismissal

New and updated

• Type:

  FAQs

  Is it possible to dismiss an employee who takes action to obtain or prevent union recognition?

• Date:

  15 April 2001

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Misconduct: Band of reasonable responses test applicable to procedure as well as outcome

  In a case where misconduct is admitted by the employee, the requirement of reasonableness in s.98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 relates not only to the outcome in terms of the penalty imposed by the employer, but also to the process by which the employer arrived at that decision, holds the Court of Appeal in Whitbread plc (trading as Whitbread Medway Inns) v Hall.

• Date:

  1 January 2001

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Macfarlane and another v Glasgow City Council

  In Macfarlane and another v Glasgow City Council [2001] IRLR 7 EAT, the EAT held that, despite a clause in the worker's contract expressly entitling the worker to substitute a replacement to do the work if unable to attend work, the worker was deemed to be an employee rather than a sub-contractor.

• Date:

  31 December 2000

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Baker v Securicor Omega Express Ltd

  In Baker v Securicor Omega Express Ltd [2000] IRLB 633 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the employer had been in breach of contact in imposing a change from weekly to monthly pay, and the employee had been constructively dismissed. However, the dismissal was fair for some other substantial reason.

• Date:

  1 November 2000

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Unfair dismissal: Tribunals should continue to apply band of reasonable responses and Burchell tests

  Both the "band or range of reasonable responses" approach to the issue of the reasonableness or unreasonableness of a dismissal and the tripartite "Burchell test" remain binding on the Court of Appeal, as well as on employment tribunals and the EAT, holds the Court of Appeal in Post Office v Foley and HSBC Bank plc (formerly Midland Bank plc) v Madden.

• Date:

  1 September 2000

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Collective redundancies: Imposition of new terms constituted proposed "dismissal as redundant"

  An employer that gave notice to terminate employees' existing contracts of employment, and offered to re-engage them on new terms, had a duty to consult employee representatives before imposing the new terms, holds the EAT in GMB v Man Truck & Bus UK Ltd.

• Date:

  1 September 2000

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Scotch Premier Meat Ltd v Burns and others

  In Scotch Premier Meat Ltd v Burns and others [2000] IRLR 639 EAT, the EAT held that an employment tribunal had not erred in holding that the employers were "proposing to dismiss as redundant 20 or more employees" within the meaning of s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act, notwithstanding that, as an alternative option, they were considering selling the business as a going concern.

• Date:

  15 April 2000

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  References: Previously undisclosed complaints in reference gave rise to constructive dismissal

  Providing an employee's prospective employer with a reference that revealed several complaints made about the employee, of which she had been unaware, constituted a breach by her employer of the implied term of trust and confidence in her contract of employment, holds the EAT in TSB Bank plc v Harris.

• Date:

  1 April 2000

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Misconduct: Range of reasonable responses test is not wrong

  In Midland Bank plc v Madden, the EAT holds that, while no court short of the Court of Appeal can discard the range or band of reasonable responses test as a determinative test, a tribunal is free to substitute its own views for those of the employer as to the reasonableness of dismissal as a response to the reason shown for it.

• Date:

  1 January 2000

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Transfer of undertakings: Dismissal by reason of transfer precludes finding of "ETO" reason

  The principal reason for the dismissal of a transferor's employees, purportedly on the grounds of redundancy, was the impending transfer of the undertaking, holds the EAT in Kerry Foods Ltd v Creber and others.