header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
10 June 2011 / John McMullen
Issue: 7469 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Adopting the right course

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

John McMullen reflects on what’s reasonable in unfair dismissal cases

It has long been settled law that when deciding whether a dismissal is fair or unfair, an employment tribunal should consider the reasonableness of the employer’s conduct and not whether it considers the dismissal to be fair.

The tribunal must not substitute its own view as to what is the right course to adopt for that of the employer. In many, although not all, cases there is a band of reasonable responses to the employee’s conduct or other situation facing the employer within which one employer might take one view and another, quite reasonably, another. If a dismissal falls within the band it is fair. If it falls outside the band it is unfair.

Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones

This canon was laid down by the seminal EAT case of Iceland Frozen Foods Limited v Jones [1982] IRLR 439 (per Browne-Wilkinson P, applying dicta of Lord Denning MR in British Leyland (UK) Ltd v Swift [1981] IRLR 91, CA).

Some 20 years

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll