header-logo header-logo

08 February 2013 / Peter Taheri
Issue: 7547 / Categories: Features , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Employment
printer mail-detail

Dismissed or not dismissed?

Has a recent High Court ruling created a new concept of accidental dismissal? Peter Taheri reports

In Smith v Trafford Housing Trust [2012] EWHC 3221 (Ch), the claimant, having been demoted, claimed breach of contract while remaining in the trust’s employment. He was awarded only £98, as the High Court held he was wrongfully dismissed. Can that be right, when the employer had not purported to dismiss and the employee never claimed constructive dismissal?

Establishing the Hogg principle

Practitioners are familiar with the concept of constructive dismissal: the employer commits a repudiatory breach of the employment contract, in response to which the employee resigns. Perhaps less everyday is Hogg v Dover College [1990] ICR 39, EAT, where the claimant’s unfair dismissal claim succeeded even though he was still in the respondent’s employ. Understanding Hogg is pre-requisite for a discussion of Smith.

In Hogg, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) found that the employee “was being told that his former contract was from that moment gone”. To the employer’s argument that there was no dismissal, only a variation, the EAT replied:

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll