-
- Type:
- FAQs
-
- Type:
- FAQs
-
- 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 January 2004
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Solectron Scotland Ltd v Roper and others [2004] IRLR 4 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the employment tribunal did not err in finding that enhanced redundancy terms over and above what was paid to the applicants on their dismissal, which formed part of their contracts of employment with their previous employer, BT, and to which they were entitled by virtue of the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations 1981, had not been removed by custom or practice.
-
- Date:
- 19 December 2003
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Dewhirst Group v GMB Trade Union, the EAT affirms that the statutory duty under UK law to consult with employee representatives in relation to collective redundancies is triggered at the point at which a "proposal" to dismiss employees is made.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Our resident experts at Pinsents bring you a comprehensive update on all the latest decisions that could affect your organisation, and advice on what to do about them.
-
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Our resident experts at Pinsents bring you a comprehensive update on all the latest decisions that could affect your organisation, and advice on what to do about them.
-
- Date:
- 10 January 2003
- Type:
- Employment law cases
In Albion Automotive Ltd v Walker and others, the Court of Appeal upholds an employment tribunal's decision that an employer who made enhanced redundancy payments according to an agreed policy for a number of years created a custom and practice from which the tribunal could infer that the employer and/or its successors intended to be contractually bound to make those payments.
-
- Type:
- FAQs
-
- Date:
- 1 August 2002
- Type:
- Employment law cases
Early retirement and enhanced benefits paid on dismissal for redundancy to employees who have reached a certain age are not "old-age, invalidity or survivors' benefits" within the meaning of article 3(4) of the EC Business Transfers Directive, even if those benefits were calculated by reference to the rules for calculating normal pension benefits, holds the European Court of Justice in Beckmann v Dynamco Whicheloe Macfarlane Ltd.