header-logo header-logo

08 March 2013
Issue: 7551 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Employment

Davies v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 135, [2013] All ER (D) 310 (Feb)

It was settled law that it was legitimate for an employer to rely on a final warning provided that it was issued in good faith, that there were at least prima facie grounds for imposing it, and that it had not been manifestly inappropriate to have issued it. The guiding principle in determining whether a dismissal was fair or unfair in cases where there had been a prior final warning did not originate in authorities, which were but instances of the application of s 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to particular sets of facts. The broad test laid down by s 98(4) of the Act was whether, in the particular case, it was reasonable for the employer to treat the conduct reason, taken together with the circumstances of the final written warning, as sufficient to dismiss the employee. In answering that question, it was not the function of the tribunal to re-open the final warning and rule on an issue raised by the employee as to whether the final warning should, or

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