header-logo header-logo

31 July 2008
Issue: 7332 / Categories: Legal News , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employer wins landmark unfair dismissal case

Legal news

Delay in dealing with any part of the statutory dismissal procedure does not render the dismissal automatically unfair, the Court of Appeal has decided.

In Selvarajan v Wilmot the court ruled that the sacking of three employees by Bolton GP Dr Selvarajan, on the grounds of misconduct, was fair.

Selvarajan fired the trio for allegedly making false overtime claims. They said their dismissal was automatically unfair because there had been a delay of several months in hearing the appeals against the decision to sack them.

Although the Employment Appeal Tribunal found that where there was non compliance with any step or general requirement of the statutory procedure this would render the procedure incomplete and thus dismissals automatically unfair, it remitted the matter to tribunal to establish whether the delay in hearing the appeal was reasonable. Selvarajan appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Joanne Martin, solicitor at Davies Arnold Cooper, who acted for Selvarajan, says: “This decision makes it clear that completion of the steps of a statutory dismissal procedure is wholly separate to compliance with the general requirements of the statutory procedures. Failure to comply with a general requirement of a procedure is not of itself a failure to complete it. For as long as the statutory procedures remain in place, all employers and practitioners should be aware of this decision.”

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