Unlawful Deduction from Wages Out of Time
The alleged ôdeductionö from wages was in fact an alleged underpayment some time after the termination of the contract of employment. In finding that time for claiming in respect of such deduction ran from the date of termination, the Tribunal fell into error. Time would normally begin to run from such date where there had been a complete non-payment, but where the claim was for an underpayment, time runs from the date when the underpayment was made for it was to be treated as the sum form which ...
|
Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of dismissal
The Employment Tribunal found certain procedural defects in handling a redundancy exercise. The questions before the EAT were: Did they constitute a breach of the relevant statutory dismissal procedure so as to render the dismissal automatically unfair under section 98A(1) ERA? Alternatively, did they render the dismissal unfair under s 98(4) ERA? If potentially they did, could the employer rely upon section 98A(2) ERA and allege that the dismissal would have occurred in any event even if proper ...
|
Unfair Dismissal - Procedural fairness/automatical
The reversal of Polkey (1987) IRLR 503 effected by Employment Rights Act 1996 s98A(2) applies to dismissals occurring on or after 1 October 2004. It applies to a failure to follow a procedure or policy covering dismissal, whether in writing or existing by custom and practice and whether contractual or non-contractual. It does not apply to failure to follow statutory procedures described in s98A(1) and (3). Nor to failure to follow the guidance in the ACAS code or general non-specific failure to ...
|
Unfair Dismissal: Procedural fairness/automaticall
This case concerns the assessment of compensation for unfair dismissal when a relevant procedure has not been followed.The reversal of Polkey (1987) IRLR 503 effected by Employment Rights Act 1996 s98A(2) applies to dismissals occurring on or after 1 October 2004. It applies to a failure to follow a procedure or policy covering dismissal, whether in writing or existing by custom and practice and whether contractual or non-contractual. It does not apply to failure to follow statutory procedures d ...
|
Disability Discrimination: disability
The claimant, a postman, had osteoarthritic changes in his right hip and chronic mechanical back pain. His employment was terminated on grounds of ill health. He claimed he had been unfairly dismissed on disability grounds. The issue of whether or not he was disabled was determined at a pre hearing review. The tribunal found that whilst the claimant had a physical impairment, it was not such as had a substantial effect on his ability to carry out normal day to day activities. The Employment Appe ...
|
Practice and Procedure - Bias, misconduct and proc
The claimant was dismissed. In her application to the Employment Tribunal, she alleged both that she had been made redundant and was entitled to a redundancy payment and that she had been unfairly dismissed and/or selected for redundancy. She also claimed unpaid wages. The respondent’s response included a statement that the claimant had been dismissed for gross industrial misconduct some of which was criminal. The Employment Tribunal refused an application for a second adjournment to allow furth ...
|
Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of dismissal
The claimant was employed as a Senior Ramp Agent at Edinburgh Airport by the respondents. In 2002, he was convicted of two charges of assault and an offence under the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. In 2003, the DTI issued regulations which required a criminal record check to be carried out in respect of all airport employees. In April 2004, the claimant’s security pass was withdrawn by the British Airports Authority after the provision of a report on his criminal conviction. The claiman ...
|
Claimant had been dismissed by the respondents, a milk and farm produce retailing business. The tribunal found that his dismissal was unfair and awarded compensation. It was accepted that the claimant had been unfairly dismissed but it had been open to th
|
Unfair dismissal- reasonableness of dismissal
The claimant, a service manager employed on the respondents’trains was dismissed on conduct grounds for having sworn at and been threatening towards a customer. She claimed she had been unfairly dismissed and the tribunal upheld her complaint. They found the respondents’ investigation to have been inadequate in respect that although they had a written complaint by the customer and had interviewed her by telephone, they had not conducted a face to face interview and should not have accepted the c ...
|
EAT was asked whether the Chairman erred in rejecting the evidence of a clinical diagnosis of severe dyslexia for reasons which were not sustainable. The question then was once this diagnosis is accepted, was it “obvious” that the effect is substantial on day-to-day activities ? The parties agreed that since the Chairman otherwise directed herself correctly, she reached the correct result.
|
| 1 2 3 |