Topics

Unfair dismissal

New and updated

  • Date:
    1 June 1992
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    De Grasse v Stockwell Tools Ltd

    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.

  • Date:
    5 October 1990
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Redundancy: Unfair redundancy dismissals - time limits and compensation

    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.

  • Date:
    6 July 1990
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Misconduct: Group dismissals deemed fair

    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.

  • Date:
    1 May 1990
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Prestwick Circuits Ltd v McAndrew

    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.

  • Date:
    21 November 1989
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Unfair dismissal: No reference to governors on college redundancies

    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.

  • Date:
    24 January 1989
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Unfair dismissal remedies: Increase in hours leads to unfair constructive dismissal

    A unilateral increase in hours of work without consultation constituted a breach of contract entitling employees to resign and claim constructive dismissal, the EAT holds in Humphreys & Glasgow Ltd v Broom and Holt*.

  • Date:
    1 December 1988
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Hooper v British Railways Board

    In Hooper v British Railways Board [1988] IRLR 517 CA, the Court of Appeal held that the terms of a negotiated agreement, which provided that a member of staff who was declared fit by his own doctor but did not meet the medical standards required by the Board's doctor "shall be paid the basic rate of pay appropriate to his grade until such time as he resumes work either in his own post or on other suitable work", meant that the employee had a contractual right to be kept on full pay until such time as he was redeployed or reached retirement age.

  • Date:
    1 June 1988
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Dismissal: Transfer to new workplace not constructive dismissal

    In Courtaulds Northern Spinning Ltd v Sibson the Court of Appeal considers whether the transfer of an employee, a heavy goods vehicle driver, from one depot to a depot one mile away breached the employee's contract of employment.

  • Date:
    19 January 1988
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Dismissal: Refusal to hear grievance may amount to constructive dismissal

    In Elder v Clydebank Co-operative Society Ltd the EAT in Scotland orders a rehearing of a constructive dismissal complaint after an industrial tribunal failed to consider whether an employers' refusal to allow an employee to appeal against a decision to transfer her to another branch amounted to constructive dismissal.

  • Date:
    4 June 1985
    Type:
    Employment law cases

    Transfer of undertakings: Changes in the workforce

    In Delabole Slate Ltd v Berriman the Court of Appeal upholds the EAT's decision that a dismissal which occurs as a consequence of a change in terms of employment following the transfer of an undertaking is not a dismissal for "an economic, technical or organisational reason entailing changes in the workforce", and so is automatically unfair under reg.8(1) of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981.

About this topic

HR and legal information and guidance relating to unfair dismissal.