We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 92

Employment tribunal was wrong to substitue its own view on dismissal
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • February 10 2012

In DB Schenker Rail (UK) Ltd v Doolan, the Scottish EAT held that an employment tribunal wrongly decided that the employer was not entitled to conclude, on the basis of expert evidence, that an employee was unfit to return to work


Unknown purchaser liable for TUPE related dismissal
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • February 10 2012

Regulation 7 of TUPE states that a dismissal will be automatically unfair if the main reason for dismissal is the transfer itself, or a reason connected with the transfer that is not an economic, technical or organisational reason entailing changes in the workforce (‘ETO reason’


Court guidance on aggravated damages
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • February 10 2012

In Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Shaw, the EAT considered when aggravated damages should be awarded, and their relationship with awards for injury to feelings


No damages for failure to follow contractual disciplinary procedures
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • February 10 2012

The Supreme Court has held that employees cannot recover damages for loss suffered as a result of a breach of a term in their employment contract as to the manner of their dismissal, unless that loss is independent of the dismissal


Length of service is not relevant to sickness investigation
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • February 10 2012

The EAT has held in another incapability case that an employment tribunal was wrong to require that an employer should have taken length of service into account, and to require that it should have followed a particular procedure when obtaining further medical evidence


New decision on marital status discrimination
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • February 10 2012

In Dunn v Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management, the EAT has held that discrimination by reason of ‘marital status’ can include less favourable treatment because an employee is married to a particular person, rather than just because that employee is married


Consultation on tribunal fees published
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • February 10 2012

The Government is seeking views on two different options for charging fees in the employment tribunal


TUPE does not apply where there are fundamental changes in activities
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • February 10 2012

In Enterprise Management Services Ltd v Connect-Up Ltd & Others, the EAT confirmed that there was no service provision change for the purposes of TUPE where the activities of an outgoing contractor (Enterprise) were not fundamentally the same as those of the incoming contractor (Connect), and where there was subsequently a ‘fragmentation’ of activities


Different treatment of employees on dismissal may be justified
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • January 25 2012

It is well established in case law that disparity of treatment between employees who have misbehaved in the same way may be grounds for unfair dismissal


Workers must take or request holiday to be entitled to holiday pay
  • Bircham Dyson Bell
  • United Kingdom
  • January 25 2012

The EAT has held that, contrary to the decisions in List Design v Douglas and Canada Life Ltd v Gray, workers are only entitled to statutory holiday pay under the Working Time Regulations if they take holiday or give notice that they wish to take holiday