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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll