header-logo header-logo

​Employment law brief

13 January 2017 / Ian Smith
Issue: 7729 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail
nlj_7729_smith

Recent case law provides a good illustration of established rules in the longstanding law on unfair dismissal, says Ian Smith

 
  • Multiple reasons in constructive dismissal cases.
  • Using lapsed warnings.
  • The right approach to whistleblowing allegations.
  • Practicability in re-engagement claims.

What the four cases considered this month have in common is that, while breaking no new ground, they are good illustrations of established rules in our longstanding law on unfair dismissal. They cover multiple reasons in constructive dismissal cases, using lapsed warnings, the right approach to whistleblowing allegations and practicability in re-engagement claims.

Constructive dismissal—multiple reasons for leaving

It is well established that where there are two or more reasons for the employee leaving, he or she will still be able to claim constructive dismissal if at least one of them constituted a repudiatory breach by the employer, and that the tribunal must not take an overly “purist” approach by looking for the principal reason for leaving. The decision of Judge Shanks in Ishaq v Royal Mail Group UKEAT/0156/16 however shows

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll