cases
-
Nunn v Royal Mail Group Ltd UKEAT/0530/09/DM
Appeal against ruling that the claimant was not dismissed by reason of making a protected disclosure. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
27/10/2010 14:12
-
Lancaster University v The University & College Union UKEAT/0278/10/JOJ
Appeal against decision by the ET that the respondent employer had failed to comply with the requirements of section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 when making redundancies, and that, if the appeal failed, the protective award should only be 30 days not 60. Cross appeal by the claimant that the protective award should be the maximum 90 days. Appeal and cross appeal dismissed.
- cases
27/10/2010 14:11
-
Whitelock & Storr & Ors v Khan UKEAT/0017/10/RN
Appeal against decision by the ET that the claimant was unfairly dismissed by reason of having made protected disclosures. The EAT said that the question that the Tribunal should have asked in relation to misconduct alleged by the respondent was whether the respondent had a reasonable belief that whilst employed by them, the claimant had acted to their detriment in breach of his duty of trust and confidence to his employers. If they did have that belief, they then had to decide if that was the reason for dismissal. This question should have been answered before the Tribunal considered the allegation of protected disclosures. Findings in relation to protected disclosure dismissal and unfair dismissal set aside; automatic unfair dismissal finding and counterclaim regarding loss of income to the respondent remitted to a different Tribunal for a re-hearing.
- cases
26/10/2010 14:31
-
Community Integrated Care v Peacock UKEATS/0015/10/BI
Appeal against decision by the ET that, even though the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was presented out of time, they could still hear her case as it was not reasonably practicable for her to have presented her claim in time due to her suffering from depression. The EAT found that the claimant's solicitor had failed to tell her about the 3 month limit. However, they ruled that this was not a case where the claimant’s health was so bad as to lead to the conclusion that even if she had been told about the time limit by her legal advisor she could not reasonably have been expected to be able to instruct the presentation of a claim. The factual findings all pointed to her having been in a position to do so if she had been told about it. Appeal succeeded and claim dismissed.
- cases
26/10/2010 14:13
-
Faleye & Anor v UK Mission Enterprise Ltd & Ors UKEAT/0359/10/LA
Appeal against decision that 4 cases which were linked should be heard together at one Tribunal. The EAT decided that the Employment Judge was perfectly entitled to proceed on the straightforward basis that all four cases needed to be case-managed together; that the only question was whether that should be in London South or London Central; that there was no particular presumption in favour of one or the other, given that no prejudice arose to the parties; and that thus the single factor clearly favouring London Central, namely its expertise in state immunity matters, should prevail. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
26/10/2010 11:35
-
Crossland v Corps of Commissionaires Management Limited [2010] EWCA Civ 1167
Application for permission to appeal a decision by the EAT, which upheld a ruling by the ET, that the claimant had not been unfairly constructively dismissed. The claimant claimed that meetings prior to the termination of his employment were in fact part of a disciplinary process and not merely investigatory. He claimed that the ET and EAT had fallen into error by deciding that the claimant had not been subject to disciplinary procedures, and thus had not been constructively dismissed but had resigned. The Court of Appeal ruled that both the ET and EAT had made a full and reasoned assessment of the case, and the appeal had no prospect of success. Application refused.
- cases
26/10/2010 11:23
-
Edem v Egg Plc & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 480
Application for permission to appeal a ruling that an appeal of 2 orders made by the Employment Judge, one refusing to provide the claimant with clarification as to what documentation was required for his appeal to the EAT, the other clarifying which of the many claims remained live and which had been struck out, had no prospect of success. Second application to re-open the appeal to the Court of Appeal, the claimant claiming that his misconceived application to the House of Lords was rejected too late to enable him to take his case to the ECHR. Both applications refused.
- cases
26/10/2010 11:00
-
Holly Richmond (formerly Richmonds Solicitors) v Day [2010] EWCA Civ 1152
Renewed application to appeal, out of time, a decision to strike out an appeal against unfair dismissal, the strike out ordered because the respondent employer had failed to provide the necessary documentation in time. Application refused.
- cases
26/10/2010 10:29
-
Munchkins Restaurants Ltd & Anor v Karmazyn & Ors [2010] EWCA Civ 1163
Application to appeal against findings by the ET, which were upheld by the EAT, that several waitresses had suffered discrimination, harassment and were unfairly constructively dismissed. It was submitted that the ET did not consider whether the claims were in time and their approach, when considering the individual claims, was too 'broad brush'. The respondent also questioned the issues of joint and several liability and whether it was rational to make the same award to each of the claimants. Application refused.
- cases
26/10/2010 09:54
-
TDG Chemical Ltd v Benton UKEAT/0166/10/DM
Appeal against decision by the Employment Tribunal that the claimant was unfairly dismissed, having been dismissed for allegedly mouthing a racist insult to a colleague. The respondent was also appealing against the award of compensation, claiming that the Tribunal had failed to give adequate reasons for its decision on remedy. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
25/10/2010 09:24
