Pilots working for British Airways plc are entitled to at least four weeks “paid annual leave”. While on leave, a pilot is paid his or her basic fixed pay. A pilot on leave is not paid two types of supplement (the ‘Flying Pay Supplement’ and the ‘Time Away from Base Allowance’) which he or she would receive if at work as additional pay for hours spent flying and being away from base. The two types of allowance are subject to limits (because of limits to th ...
|
Practice and Procedure - Perversity This is an appeal against an Employment Tribunal’s judgement arguing perversity. The EAT held that, based upon the facts, no evidence of perversity and the appeal was dismissed.
|
Jurisdictional Points - Worker, employee or neither The Tribunal accepted jurisdiction in a case in which the employee who lived and worked mainly in England drove lorries for a company based in Northern Ireland. There was no evidence the company had an office in England. The Tribunal failed to give sufficient reasons why it concluded it had jurisdiction, and may have asked where the employee worked or was based rather than the appropriate, and different, question which was whether the em ...
|
Practice and Procedure - Appellate jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke This is an appeal regarding whether the Tribunal’s judgement was Meek compliant. There was a failure by the Employment Tribunal to explain why they preferred the evidence of one witness to another on a crucial factual issue. Observations of Morison P in Tchoula approved by the Court of Appeal in Anya (para 24) applied. Case remitted to fresh employment tribunal for rehearing on issue of sex discrimination.
|
Practice and Procedure - Appellate jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke Appeal in respect of the award by the Tribunal of £3,000 costs, and cross-appeal in respect of the calculation of future loss of £35,700 both allowed, because the Tribunal had failed to give any adequate explanation of these awards, and in particular how the figures were arrived at. A further point arose during the hearing before the Appeal Tribunal, as to which there appeared to be no authority – that is ...
|
Practice and Procedure - Review Claim under Disability Discrimination Act 1995 dismissed at PHR because Claimant not available to give evidence as to long-term effect of injury – Judge willing to offer adjournment if absence of Claimant had been explained and adjournment applied for – Counsel tells Judge that he does not know reason for Claimant’s absence and fails to apply for adjournment – At subsequent review hearing Claimant proves that counsel had given him express ...
|
Practice and Procedure - Appellate jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke This is an appeal which held that the Appellant was entitled to a R3(10) hearing following rejection of his second Notice under R3(8). The appeal was without merit. That R3(10) application was dismissed.
|
Contract of Employment - Wrongful dismissal An employee claimed that a Tribunal was perverse to reject his claim that the employer must have been in breach of the implied term of trust and confidence in circumstances where he had refused to provide a company car of the style requested by the employee, then criticised the employee to a junior employee and others outside the company for the way he handled complaints about the car he was given, then circulated - to the same junior employee ...
|
Practice and Procedure - Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity Employment Appeal Tribunal practice – allegations of apparent bias/procedural irregularity – EAT findings of fact as to what occurred before the Employment Tribunal. Based on those findings the Porter v Magill test of the fair-minded observer was not met in this case. Award of £10,000 costs upheld on the basis of the Employment Tribunal’s reasoning. Lodwick v Southwark L.B. considered.
|
Unfair Dismissal - S.98A(2) ERA This is an appeal which held that the Employment Tribunal had made a number of flawed findings regarding the procedure followed by the Respondent and that the Tribunal’s conclusions also seemed to be flawed. Case remitted for re-hearing before a differently constituted employment tribunal.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |