header-logo header-logo

11 December 2009 / Rad Kohanzad
Issue: 7397 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Balance of payments

Rad Kohanzad examines the dents in the Norton Tool principle

The decision of the Court of Appeal in Stuart Peters v Bell [2009] EWCA Civ 938, [2009] All ER (D) 54 (Oct) provides that an employee who is constructively unfairly dismissed without notice has to give credit for earnings he earns during his notice period. An expressly dismissed employee does not.

This decision represents another nail in the coffin for the “notice pay” point in Norton Tool v Tewson [1972] ICR 501, [1973] 1 All ER 183. Are there any more such nails lurking? 

Section 123 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is the statutory provision that dictates compensation in unfair dismissal cases, and is the same provision that was in existence at the time of Norton Tool, although within a different Act.

NIRC ruling

In apparent contradiction to the common law duty to mitigate your losses, the National Industrial Relations Court (NIRC)—now the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT)—in the case of Norton Tool, found that where employees are unfairly dismissed without notice they are entitled to be paid their full notice pay, even if

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll