cases
-
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
-
Fulcrum Pharma (Europe) Ltd v Bonassera & Anor UKEAT/0198/10/DM
Appeal against findings that the employers had failed to consult properly on the size of the pool when considering redundancy and that the pool had to include two people. The EAT found that the ET was correct in the first finding but had erred on the size of the pool and the case was sent back for reconsideration.
- cases
25/10/2010 08:37
-
Russell & Ors v Transocean International Resources Ltd & Ors [2010] CSIH 82
Appeal against decision by the EAT that workers employed on an oil rig could not take their annual leave during the period for which they were working offshore. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
21/10/2010 16:50
-
Weston Recovery Services v Fisher UKEAT/0062/10/ZT
Appeal against a finding of unfair dismissal after the Tribunal concluded that, although the behaviour of the claimant could be described as misconduct, it was not gross misconduct. Therefore the employer was entitled to dismiss him with the proper notice, but not summarily dismiss him. The EAT upheld the appeal, saying that the employer had passed the Burchell test, followed a fair procedure and imposed a sanction, dismissal, which fell within the range of reasonable responses. However, they also said that the claimant had been wrongfully dismissed, so was entitled to notice pay. The award was reduced by the amount of the basic award.
- cases
20/10/2010 15:11
-
Riniker v City & Islington College Corporation UKEATPA/0541/10/CEA; UKEATPA/0542/10/CEA
Rule 3(10) application appealing against: 1) the refusal by the Employment Judge to make changes, under the slip rule, to the title and substance of a review judgment; 2) the allegedly inconsistent, anomalous and unlawful situation that there were two judgments on the record in this case; and 3) the refusal to order the production of the Employment Judge's notes. 'Pre-hearing review' substituted with 'hearing' in ground 1. Other applications refused.
- cases
20/10/2010 15:11
-
Pinewood Repro Ltd T/A County Print v Page UKEAT/0028/10/SM
Appeal against ET decision that the claimant had been unfairly dismissed in relation to redundancy. The appeal focussed on the Tribunal’s findings that the respondent had failed to conduct adequate or effective consultation with the claimant by reason of their failure to provide him with an adequate explanation of why he had received lower scores than the two other people in the pool for redundancy, and also the Tribunal’s decision not to make a Polkey deduction. The EAT found that the conclusion the ET came to was simply that the matters relied on by the assessors to mark down the claimant were patently challengeable. On the Polkey issue they agreed with the Tribunal’s analysis there was a reasonable chance that he would not have been dismissed. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
14/10/2010 15:34
