Claim Form sufficiently raised a cause of action under s.137 TULR(C)A 1992 and should have been accepted.
|
Contract of Employment - Definition of employee:-T
|
The Trade Union successfully obtained a Protective Award against a company (now in administration) for breach of the obligation to consult it in relation to employees in respect of whom the Union was recognised. ET decision upheld that the protective award does not enure to the benefit of other employees in respect of whom the Trade Union is not recognised, whose representatives are also said not to have been consulted.
|
Trade Union Rights û Dismissal
The Claimant was dismissed when his employer took the view that he had fraudulently produced documents to excuse his prolonged absence in Pakistan. The Claimant was an FOC who contended his dismissal was on account of his trade union activities. The Tribunal found that the dismissal was automatically unfair as step one of the statutory procedure had not been followed. Although not necessary for its Judgment, it went on to decide that the reason for dismissal was conduct and not trade union activ ...
|
Employee based in Paris. Whether ERA and SDA jurisdiction excluded. SERCO SAGGERS (EAT). Challenge to ET findings of fact. No error of law shown. Appeal dismissed.
|
Tribunal erred in failing to have proper regard to proportionality.
|
No grounds for re-opening the judgment of Judge Clark on an earlier appeal arising out of the same order. Judge ClarkÆs judgment determinative of this appeal. Limited order for costs against Appellant.
|
'But it wouldn't have made a difference…'. Kelly-Madden v Manor Surgery: The law states that, as long an employer follows the statutory dismissal procedure (essentially: letter, meeting, appeal), the fact it might not have followed a fuller procedure will not make a dismissal unfair provided it can show that the fuller procedure would probably not have made a difference to the end result. Different divisions of the Employment Appeal Tribunal are battling it out over what is meant, in this conte ...
|
Waiver of Without Prejudice Communications: In Brunel Univeristy v Webster & Vaseghi, the Court of Appeal considered the issue of waiving without prejudice status and held that where both parties referred to without prejudice communications in the ET1 and ET3 that was sufficient to waive privilege. The Court of Appeal declined to comment on the decision in BNP Paribas v Mezzotero but did mention that this exception to the sanctity of 'without prejudice' communications should only arise if one of ...
|
Allegations that Claimants had made unwarranted demands in original tribunal proceedings said to be victimisation.Grievance procedure heard evidence relating to without prejudice discussions to show who wa
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |