header-logo header-logo

Termination dates

Sarah Crowther reflects on the human dimension of effective determination dates

The Supreme Court has handed down its judgment in Gisda Cyf v Barratt [2010] UKSC 41, the latest instalment in the legal uncertainty which has surrounded determination of the effective date of termination (EDT) in employment cases. It has upheld the decision of the majority of the Court of Appeal, but does the final word leave the law sufficiently certain for practitioners, employers and employees?

Section 97(1)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 provides that the EDT is, in a case of termination of employment without notice, the date on which termination takes effect. This somewhat elusive provision is hugely important in employment cases. 

  • Most obviously it determines the date on which time starts to run for limitation purposes in unfair dismissal claims and discrimination claims where the act complained of is dismissal or where dismissal is the last event in a course of conduct.
  • It is relevant in determining which substantive law applies, such as in recent changes to the law regarding dispute resolution procedures and also the Equality Act 2010.
  • In
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