header-logo header-logo

28 June 2007 / Suzanne Palmer
Issue: 7279 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Objecting conscientiously

Suzanne Palmer discusses the clash between breach of contract claims and statutory grievance procedures

There has been much discussion about the various problems, amounting to a technical minefield for the unwary, posed by the practical application of the statutory dispute resolution mechanism instigated by the Employment Act 2002 (EA 2002) and the Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/752) (the regulations). This article examines a problem apparently unique to breach of contract claims brought under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 (SI 1994/1623) (the order) and the combined effect of EA 2002 and the regulations on such claims.

BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIMS

EA 2002, ss 31 and 32 are both predicated on the premise that one of the statutory procedures applies. The next point of reference here is the regulations, which state (in reg 2) that “applicable statutory procedure” means “the statutory procedure that applies by virtue of these Regulations”. Regulation 3 sets out the circumstances in which the statutory disciplinary procedure (SDP) applies—where the employer contemplates dismissal or other action based on conduct or capability.

Regulation 6

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll