In the case of Benveniste v Kingston University, the EAT has confirmed that by mistakenly paying in lieu of notice, the employer did not waive its right to rely on the employee's gross misconduct and dismiss her summarily. The letter confirming Ms Benveniste's summary dismissal for gross misconduct was not clearly drafted. It said: "…I have no alternative but to dismiss you with effect from today's date, 13 August 2004 …. As you are entitled to six months' notice, you will be paid six months' notice in lieu of notice and you will no longer be required to work for the University. Your last day of service will be today, 13 August". The University made a payment in lieu of notice in accordance with the letter. Dr Benveniste brought a claim against the University for loss of pension rights during the notice period. The EAT dismissed her claim. It held that the University was entitled to dismiss her without notice and the terms of the letter and the mistaken payment in lieu of notice made no difference to this position. Employers can take comfort from the confirmation that mistaken drafting cannot affect the true legal position between the parties. However it illustrates the necessity of taking care that the terms of any dismissal letter are accurate.