Automatically unfair dismissal

New and updated

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Tribunal may leave some stones unturned

  The Court of Appeal gives important guidance on how far tribunals need to go in exploring the circumstances of a claim. Plus cases on protected disclosure, redundancy selection, discrimination by an agent, working time exemptions and constructive dismissal.

• Type:

  FAQs

  Can an employer dismiss an employee for making a public interest disclosure?

• Type:

  FAQs

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

• 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.

• Date:

  15 November 1998

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Transfer of undertakings: Dismissal by reason of transfer is effective

  Employees who are dismissed by the transferor of an undertaking, and then re-engaged by the transferee on different but agreed terms, are not entitled to retain the benefit of their previous terms of employment, holds the House of Lords in Wilson and others v St Helens Borough Council and Baxendale and Meade v British Fuels Ltd.

• Date:

  15 April 1998

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Maternity rights: Pregnancy dismissal protection applies after expiry of maternity leave

  In Caledonia Bureau Investment & Property v Caffrey, the EAT holds that the automatically unfair dismissal provision which protects a woman against dismissal for a reason "connected with her pregnancy" is not limited to dismissals occurring during the period of pregnancy and maternity leave.

• Date:

  1 December 1997

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Goodwin v Cabletel UK Ltd

  In Goodwin v Cabletel UK Ltd [1997] IRLR 665 EAT, the EAT held that the industrial tribunal had erred in holding that the dismissal of the appellant "designated employee" could not fall within the protection against dismissal for carrying out activities in connection with preventing or reducing risks to health and safety at work provided by the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act because it was the way in which he carried out his health and safety activities, rather than the actual doing of them, which led to his dismissal.

• Date:

  1 November 1997

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Asserting statutory rights: Allegation of infringement of right must be reason for dismissal

  In Mennell v Newell & Wright (Transport Contractors) Ltd, the Court of Appeal holds that an employee may have the right not to be unfairly dismissed for asserting a relevant statutory right even though the employer has not actually infringed that right.

• Date:

  15 October 1997

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Health and safety: Safety representative intended to embarrass employer

  Where a safety representative claims that he or she was subjected to a detriment for performing functions as an acknowledged health and safety representative, it is no defence for the employer to argue that the representative intended to embarrass the company in front of the external safety authorities or performed those functions in an unreasonable way unacceptable to the employer, holds the EAT in Shillito v Van Leer (UK) Ltd.

• Date:

  15 June 1996

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Transfer of undertakings: Employee's objection to transfer meant no dismissal

  An industrial tribunal was entitled to find that an employee objected to transferring to a new employer and informed his employer of that objection, holds the EAT in Hay v George Hanson (Building Contractors) Ltd.