header-logo header-logo

04 June 2010
Issue: 7420 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Employment

Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2010] EWCA Civ 571, [2010] All ER (D) 247 (May)

Whether parties intended the provisions relating to disciplinary procedures to sound in damages depended on the true construction of the contract. There was no reason why the parties should not be able to agree that they did sound in damages.

Moreover, dismissal was often the final step in a continuing course of conduct, in cases where the claimant relied on the common law implied term it would sometimes be necessary to determine whether the act relied on formed part of the process of dismissal or preceded it.

However, the need for that enquiry did not arise in a case where the employee relied on an express term of the contract and accordingly in such cases the exclusion area was not a relevant concept.
 

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