Unfair Dismissal - Dismissal/ambiguous resignation The Tribunal failed to make clear findings about the date of termination or the manner in which the employment contract was terminated.
|
Unfair Dismissal - Reasonableness of dismissal This appeal held that there was no error in Tribunal’s conclusions as to fairness of dismissal for refusing to comply with a redeployment clause.
|
Jurisdictional Points - 2002 Act and pre-action requirements This appeal held that a claim for detriment under section 48 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 does require a grievance letter to launch proceedings. Schedule 2, paragraph 15, Employment Act 2002 only applies to the protected disclosures provision in Part 4A of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
|
Practice and Procedure - Restricted Reporting Order Restricted Reporting Order relating to allegations of sexual misconduct – Whether Tribunal entitled to vary order in order to permit naming of Claimants against the objection of the alleged perpetrators? Held: (a) that there were sufficient grounds to justify reconsideration by the Tribunal, notwithstanding a previous order prohibiting the naming of the Claimants - Hart v English Heritage [2006] ICR 655 considered; (b) that it was in ...
|
Jurisdictional Points - Worker, employee or neither The employee was a waitress at the Appellant’s Italian restaurant in Bath. The Employment Tribunal found that she was an employee and had been unfairly dismissed. The appeal was directed at the former finding. She was able to choose her own holiday; and there was a 6-week period in which there was no work for her; but the Employment Tribunal found that the Appellants were bound to offer her work; and she was bound to accept it absent ...
|
Jurisdictional Points - Extension of time: just and equitable In considering whether it is just and equitable to exercise its discretion under Section 68 of the Race Relations Act 1976 to extend the time for the submission of the Originating Application the Employment Tribunal should have regard to the total period of delay.
|
Jurisdictional Points - Excluded employments The issue in this case is whether the Employment Tribunal was entitled to refuse to review three earlier decisions in which it had concluded that the respondent Authority could not claim state immunity because the claimant fell into one of the exceptions in section 4 of the State Immunity Act 1978. It then subsequently awarded the claimant compensation for unfair dismissal and other breaches of statutory employment rights. The EAT, whilst ...
|
Religion or Belief Discrimination The claimant was a Christian who objected to BA’s policy of requiring jewellery to be worn concealed by the uniform. There were exceptions for those whose religions required them to wear items that could not be so concealed. She brought claims of direct and indirect discrimination on grounds of religious belief, as well as harassment discrimination. All these claims failed. She appealed against the finding of indirect discrimination onl ...
|
Jurisdictional Points - Fraud and illegality The claimant was a foreign student studying in the UK, who worked in breach of the conditions imposed as a term of his student visa. He worked longer hours than were permitted in term time. He alleged that his employers were in breach of the minimum wage. The employers took as a preliminary point that the contract was illegal. The Employment Tribunal rejected that contention. The EAT upheld the employer’s appeal in part, holding that p ...
|
Equal Pay Act - Equal value This is an appeal regarding equal pay claims relating to local authority home helps and the issue of time bar. The claims were in respect of inequality of pay between 1998 and February 2005 presented in December 2007. In February 2005, home helps took up posts of social care officers. Tribunal satisfied that these were new contracts and six month period to lodge claims ran from that date. Appeal refused.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |