header-logo header-logo

13 January 2017 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7729 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

​Employment law brief

nlj_7729_smith

Recent case law provides a good illustration of established rules in the longstanding law on unfair dismissal, says Ian Smith

 
  • Multiple reasons in constructive dismissal cases.
  • Using lapsed warnings.
  • The right approach to whistleblowing allegations.
  • Practicability in re-engagement claims.

What the four cases considered this month have in common is that, while breaking no new ground, they are good illustrations of established rules in our longstanding law on unfair dismissal. They cover multiple reasons in constructive dismissal cases, using lapsed warnings, the right approach to whistleblowing allegations and practicability in re-engagement claims.

Constructive dismissal—multiple reasons for leaving

It is well established that where there are two or more reasons for the employee leaving, he or she will still be able to claim constructive dismissal if at least one of them constituted a repudiatory breach by the employer, and that the tribunal must not take an overly “purist” approach by looking for the principal reason for leaving. The decision of Judge Shanks in Ishaq v Royal Mail Group UKEAT/0156/16 however shows that it is still the case that, as causation is a requirement,

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