header-logo header-logo

11 December 2009 / Rad Kohanzad
Issue: 7397 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Balance of payments

Rad Kohanzad examines the dents in the Norton Tool principle

The decision of the Court of Appeal in Stuart Peters v Bell [2009] EWCA Civ 938, [2009] All ER (D) 54 (Oct) provides that an employee who is constructively unfairly dismissed without notice has to give credit for earnings he earns during his notice period. An expressly dismissed employee does not.

This decision represents another nail in the coffin for the “notice pay” point in Norton Tool v Tewson [1972] ICR 501, [1973] 1 All ER 183. Are there any more such nails lurking? 

Section 123 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is the statutory provision that dictates compensation in unfair dismissal cases, and is the same provision that was in existence at the time of Norton Tool, although within a different Act.

NIRC ruling

In apparent contradiction to the common law duty to mitigate your losses, the National Industrial Relations Court (NIRC)—now the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT)—in the case of Norton Tool, found that where employees are unfairly dismissed without notice they are

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

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll