RELEVANT CASES

The law relating to employees rights is set out is legislation enacted by Parliament. How the legislation is interpreted is often defined by judges when they consider case before them. There are cases that will be relevant to your case and we have set out a list of some important cases.

Case law changes over time. New changes are constantly changing the law. In the circumstances you need to take advice about what cases are relevant to your situation at the time you decide to issue proceedings. Some relevant cases are set out below.  

DISMISSAL

1.              Unfair dismissal,

When deciding whether or not a dismissal is fair, an Employment Tribunal should not substitute its view for the decision of the employer. However, an Employment Tribunal has to objectively test whether the sanction of dismissal was within a range of reasonable responses open to a reasonable employer. The test to be applied by the Tribunal is set out in the case of Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones 1982 IRLR 439 EAT. 

Similarly, the test to be applied when deciding whether or not any investigation into the circumstances that led to decision to dismiss is set out in the case of Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt 2003 IRLR 23CA. 

In a case where the employer believes or suspects and employee is guilty of misconduct, in determining whether the dismissal is fair or not an Employment Tribunal should follow the principles set out in the case of British Home Stores Ld v Burchell 1978 IRLR 379, which indicates that when the Employment Tribunal has to decide whether the employer entertained a reasonable suspicion amounting to a belief in the guilt of the employee. This involves three elements, firstly the employer did believe that the employee was guilty of misconduct, secondly it must be shown that it was reasonable to believe that the employee was guilty of the misconduct, and thirdly, when reaching the decision that the employee was guilty of the misconduct, the employer must have carried out as much investigation into the matter as was reasonable.   

2.              Constructive Unfair Dismissal,

In some cases an employee is considered to have been constructively unfairly dismissed if their employer is guilty of conduct that is a significant breach of the contract of employment or is conduct that shows that the employer no longer intends to be bound by one or more of the essential terms of the contract of employment. (Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp 1978 IRLR 27 CA)

DISCRIMINATION

3.                 

In summary, Sex, Race, Disability, Religious belief, Sexual Orientation, Age discrimination, and discrimination on grounds of marriage, all require the employee to show that their employer has treated them less favourably because of their situation. If an employer is unable to explain the reason for the less favourable treatment and Employment Tribunal should conclude that in the absence of a satisfactory explanation the employee concerned has been discriminated against. Discrimination can either be direct or indirect.