The EAT case of King v Royal Bank of Canada establishes that a Tribunal should still consider reinstatement or re-engagement as a remedy even where there was a genuine redundancy and at that moment in time no alternative positions. The tribunal can examine vacancies at a different point in time to when the dismissal occurred.
The Agency Workers Regulations 2010 that came into force on 1 October 2011 have had an effect on other legislation. They have amended TUPE and have also amended the rules about collective consultation in collective redundancy situations (redundancy situations involving 20 or more employees). Where an employer proposes to dismiss 20 or more employees, the […]
The Agency Worker Regulations 2010 that came into effect on 1 October 2011 have changed employers’ information and consultation obligations under TUPE. As well as information about the fact, date, reason, legal, social and economic implications of the transfer and information about measures (if any) employers must now provide the following information: the number of agency workers working temporarily […]
This case at the EAT serves as a reminder that a complete re-hearing on appeal can cure any procedural defects at the first instance disciplinary hearing. It also servers as a reminder that not all procedural defects will result in a dismissal being unfair – if the defect didn’t cause the Claimant to suffer any […]
The EAT case of Mrs Smith (amongst others) v Trustees of Brooklands College addresses the at times perplexing question of when can an employer vary contractual terms post TUPE transfer? It is trite law that contractual variations are void if they were for a reason connected with a TUPE transfer. The Claimants were employed at […]
This case at the EAT re-iterates the considerations that apply when an application is made to amend an appeal at a rule 3(10) hearing (a hearing before a lone EAT Judge with only the Appellant present to try and get their appeal accepted in circumstances where it has been rejected during the sift as not […]
Ram v J.D Weatherspoon is a useful reminder on the principles governing unfair dismissal compensation. The appropriate question that the Tribunal asks is what would have happened if the Claimant had not been unfairly dismissed. Could the Claimant have been fairly dismissed for the same reason or any other reason within a specified length of […]
We are seeing a large proportion of our time being spent in dispute with insurers on a number of issues largely for employees. These range on freedom of choice of instruction of solicitor, prospects of success and even after appointmentis agreed the hourly rates and costs negotiation. If you have legal expenses insurance then this […]
This case at the EAT illustrates how Polkey can operate to reduce the Claimant’s award after a dismissal is found to be unfair on procedural grounds. In this case, the defect in process was not considering all available suitable alternative employment. However, based on the evidence before the Tribunal (which included that the Claimant rejected […]
At the conservative conference the Chancellor has announced that it will introduce fees to bring a claim before the Employment Tribunal from 2013. The amount that will be charged and how it should be paid will be the subject of consultation which will start in the next few months. At present, there are no fees […]
