header-logo header-logo

17 April 2014 / Anna Macey
Issue: 7603 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Zoned out

Does the Johnson exclusion zone apply to constructive dismissal? Anna Macey reports

In Gebremariam v Ethiopian Airlines Enterprise (t/a Ethiopian Airlines) UKEAT/0439/12/GE, Ethiopian Airlines employed Ms Gebremariam as a ticket officer before selecting her for redundancy, without any procedures or selection criteria. She put in an appeal, complaining about the lack of procedures, and shortly after the respondent upheld her complaints and froze the redundancy process. Gebremariam then resigned, claiming constructive dismissal, among other things.

The employment tribunal (ET) found the respondent had not breached any terms of Gebremariam’s contract before the redundancy notice was given to her, but that the lack of procedures during the redundancy process did amount to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. However, when the respondent agreed to start the redundancy process afresh, the ET held there was no basis on which Gebremariam’s loss of trust and confidence in the respondent could be maintained, and her claim for constructive dismissal therefore failed.

Before the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) there were multiple points of appeal and cross-appeal.

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll