Unfair dismissal
An employee was fairly dismissed when he lost his driving licence, holds the EAT in John Liddington Ltd v Blackett, given that his job involved substantial travelling and the employer had concluded, after careful consideration of alternative arrangements, that the job could not be done properly without a car.
An industrial tribunal's decision that a painter was unfairly dismissed for using company materials to paint guttering at a house not included in the works contract was flawed, holds the Court of Session in McGuire v Brawley Brothers Ltd.
An employee who resigned when her employer threatened to terminate her contract with due notice if she refused to agree to a change in her shift pattern was constructively dismissed, rules the EAT in Greenaway Harrison Ltd v Wiles.
When deciding whether to order the re-employment of an unfairly dismissed employee, an industrial tribunal only has to make a "provisional" determination or assessment on the practicability of the employer complying with such an order, holds the Court of Appeal in Port of London Authority v Payne and others.
In Frames Snooker Centre v Boyce [1992] IRLR 472 EAT, the EAT held that where any one of a group of employees could have committed a particular offence meriting dismissal, the fact that one or more of them was not dismissed does not make the dismissals of the remainder unfair if the employer is able to show that it had "solid and sensible grounds", which do not have to be related to the relevant offence, for differentiating between members of the group.
In De Grasse v Stockwell Tools Ltd [1992] IRLR 269 EAT, the EAT held that the Industrial Tribunal had erred in holding that the appellant employee's dismissal on grounds of redundancy was fair, notwithstanding that there had been no prior consultation or warning.
An industrial tribunal was entitled to exercise its discretion to extend the time limit for unfair dismissal applications from redundant employees, who mistakenly believed that work would "pick up"; and they would be re-employed, until two weeks after the employer's business closed down.
If an employer cannot determine which individual(s), out of a group of possible culprits, are guilty of dishonesty, it may decide to dismiss them all. In Parr v Whitbread plc t/a Threshers Wine Merchants, the EAT holds that such dismissals may be fair, as long as certain criteria are met.
In Prestwick Circuits Ltd v McAndrew [1990] IRLR 191 CS, the Court of Session held that the implied right to order a transfer from one place of employment to another must be subject to the implied qualification that reasonable notice must be given in all the circumstances of the case.
It was not unfair for a local education authority to dismiss three lecturers for redundancy without reference to their college's governors, even though their lecturers' contracts of employment contemplated that the governors would decide whether to dismiss.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to unfair dismissal.