Unfair dismissal
COVID-19: dismissal for refusing to agree variation to employment contract is unfair
Dismissal for refusing to wear face mask can be fair
Over the past year, face masks have become an ordinary part of life and it was only a matter of time before they became the focus of a workplace dispute. In the first such dispute to reach a tribunal, Kubilius v Kent Foods Ltd (ET/3201960/2020), an employment tribunal found that a lorry driver was dismissed fairly for his refusal to wear a face mask on a client's premises.
Can unguaranteed work constitute alternative employment in redundancy situations?
EAT confirms “unofficial” work prior to formal start date may not count towards a period of continuous employment
Government announces increase in maximum weekly pay and compensatory award
Employment Tribunal entitled to re-label decision to dismiss
In a recent Scottish case, the Court of Session has held that an Employment Tribunal (ET) was entitled to re-label […]
Manifesting one's beliefs vs inappropriately proselytising them – where is the line?
In Kuteh v. Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust [2019] EWCA Civ 818 the Court of Appeal was asked to consider […]
Is it safe to dismiss an employee who is receiving long-term disability benefits?
The EAT has dealt a blow to employers, confirming that the purpose of permanent health insurance and similar schemes would […]
Dismissal of pilot with anxiety-related sickness absences held to be procedurally unfair
In Matthew Guest v. Flybe Limited, the Birmingham Employment Tribunal considered whether the dismissal of a pilot who had various […]
Does giving notice amount to an unambiguous act of resignation from employment?
An employee giving notice does not necessarily amount to an unambiguous act of resignation from employment, the Employment Appeal Tribunal found in East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust v Levy.
Kilraine v London Borough of Wandsworth [2018]
A recent case has considered the issue of what amounts to a protected disclosure. In Kilraine v. London Borough of Wandsworth [2018], the Court of Appeal guided Employment Tribunals in such cases to focus on determining whether there was a "protected disclosure" and whether the disclosed information, showed or tended to show that one or more of the six specified types of malpractice had taken place or was likely to take place – for example a breach of a legal obligation.