header-logo header-logo

22 January 2009
Issue: 7353 / Categories: Case law , Practice areas , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment

Law Alderson v Wings Aeromedical Services Ltd [2009] All ER (D) 11 (Jan)

When calculating “a week’s pay” for the purposes of assessing compensation for unfair dismissal in the case of an employee who does not have normal working hours under his contract of employment, the tribunal should ascertain the average weekly pay in the period of 12 weeks ending with the week in which the contract of employment terminated or, if that date was not the last day of the week, the last complete week before it.

 

If, in that 12-week period, there are any weeks in which no remuneration was payable, any such week must be disregarded and the tribunal must look at earlier weeks in which remuneration was payable so as to bring up to 12 the number of weeks from which the average is calculated.

 

The tribunal should not consider the reasons why, in any week, no remuneration was payable. The tribunal has to decide only, in respect of each week which might be included in the 12 weeks,

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll