header-logo header-logo

14 February 2008
Issue: 7308 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Employment
printer mail-detail

EMPLOYMENT LAW

Triggs v GAB Robins (UK) Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 17, [2008] All ER (D) 266 (Jan)

The claimant had been constructively dismissed through the employer’s antecedent breaches of the implied term of trust and confidence that had caused her illness and, in turn, reduced her earning capacity.

 

However, it was fallacious to regard those antecedent breaches as constituting the dismissal, since the dismissal was effected by her resignation.

The employee, on a claim for unfair dismissal, is entitled to compensation for whatever loss flowed from that dismissal, but that does not include loss, including future loss, flowing from wrongs already inflicted upon her by the employer’s prior conduct—since those losses, including any future lost income, had not been caused by the dismissal.

 

 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll