cases
-
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC v McClelland UKEAT/0096/10
Appeal against decision of the ET that a sex discrimination should proceed to a full hearing, the respondent contending that the claim was out of time. The claimant argued that what happened during the grievance procedure was a continuance of the discriminatory treatment of which she was complaining. The Tribunal concluded that the claim for sex discrimination should proceed to a hearing before a full Tribunal which would hear the evidence and would decide whether the way the grievance procedure was conducted was part of a continuing act. If it was not, then the Tribunal would have to decide whether it would be just and equitable to assume jurisdiction. If it did, it would consider the substance of the case. The EAT upheld this ruling saying that the Employment Judge cannot be said to have approached the question in an erroneous way in law, nor was his conclusion either perverse or evidence of a misdirection of law.
- cases
18/04/2010 13:10
-
Yusuf Dogan v London Borough of Greenwich UKEAT 0525 09
Appeal against decision that the claimant had been fairly dismissed. Following an investigation the claimant was dismissed, an internal appeal arranged 6 months after the dismissal. The claimant refused to attend the appeal hearing, saying that the unreasonable delay already rendered his dismissal automatically unfair. Whilst the ET ruled that the delay was unreasonable the statutory dispute procedure had been completed, albeit without the claimant being present at the hearing. The EAT upheld the ET's decision.
- cases
18/04/2010 13:09
-
Ridge v Land Registry UKEAT/0382/09/ ZT
Appeal against decision by the ETdismissing claims that the respondent had not made reasonable adjustments in a disability case, and that the ET had failed to deal with the claimant's comparators in respect of discretionary payments. First ground failed; second ground on comparators succeeded and remitted back to the same Tribunal.
- cases
18/04/2010 13:08
-
Ward v Ashkenazi UKEAT/0416/09/JOJ & UKEAT/0417/09/JOJ
Appeal by employee against the compensation award made after a finding of unfair dismissal. Appeal succeeded in part.
- cases
18/04/2010 13:07
-
Southern v Wadacre Ltd T/A Wadacre Farm Day Nursery UKEAT/0380/09/JOJ
Appeal against Employment Tribunal's ruling that the claimant was not constructively unfairly dismissed. The EAT upheld the appeal saying that the ET had 1) failed to determine the question whether the Respondents were in fundamental breach of contract, and 2) stated the conclusion that the Claimant “accepted the breach” without any reasoning.
- cases
18/04/2010 13:05
-
Langston v Department for Business Enterprise & Regulatory Reform UKEAT/0534/09/ZT
Appeal against 100% reduction in basic and compensatory awards after claim of unfair dismissal was upheld. Appeal allowed and matter was remitted to a different Tribunal.
- cases
18/04/2010 13:04
-
Launahurst v Larner [2010] EWCA Civ 334
Appeal against a ruling by the ET, and upheld by the EAT, that the claimant was an employee of the respondent and the ET thus had jurisdiction to hear a claim against unfair dismissal. Appeal succeeded and the claim for unfair dismissal was dismissed.
- cases
16/04/2010 14:22
-
Mezey v South West London & St George's Mental Health NHS Trust [2010] EWCA Civ 293
Appeal by a hospital trust against an injunction preventing them from taking disciplinary action against one of their employees. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
08/04/2010 11:54
-
Aziz v FDA [2010] EWCA Civ 304
Appeal against decision of the EAT that the ET was correct to dismiss claims of race discrimination because the claims were out of time. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
07/04/2010 16:11
-
Dandpat v University of Bath [2010] EWCA Civ 305
Application to appeal against decision of the EAT not to award interim relief to the claimant who was pursuing a claim for unfair dismissal resulting from protected disclosures. The claimant first argued that oral submissions should have been heard as well as written evidence read. He also argued that the court should revisit the definition of the word 'likely' as described in Taplin v Shippam Ltd and conclude that the test of likelihood of success should be lower in this case. Application refused.
- cases
07/04/2010 15:40
