House of Lords
Stringer and ors v Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs [2009] UKHL 31
The House of Lords said that workers who are denied holiday pay can pursue a tribunal claim for unauthorised deductions from wages under the Employment Rights Act 1996 as well as the WTR. The House of Lords has now decided that claims for unpaid holiday and/or a payment on termination can be pursued as unauthorised deduction claims under the ERA as well as the WTR, saying that the reference to "wages payable to workers in connection with their employment" in section 27 ERA must be interpreted widely. Read more.
Court of Appeal
Somerset County Council and another v Pike [2009] EWCA Civ 808 CA
The Court of Appeal has held that rules in the Teachers' Pension Scheme that exclude retired teachers who return to part-time work could be indirectly discriminatory. Mrs Pike, who was a teacher, took early retirement on ill-health grounds in 1993. She returned to part-time work in 1994 but, under the rules of the scheme, teachers who retire and then return to part-time teaching can not rejoin the scheme but those who return on a full-time basis can rejoin.
The employment tribunal had been wrong to define the pool for comparison as the entire teaching profession. The Court of Appeal agreed with the EAT that the pool should consist only of teachers wishing to return to work and excluding those who are not interested in the post-retirement rules. The approach of excluding from the pool those who are uninterested in the advantage had been approved by the Court of Appeal in Grundy v British Airways plc [2008] IRLR 74 CA. Read more.
Kulkarni v Milton Keynes Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and another[2009] EWCA Civ 789 CA
The Court of Appeal has held that a doctor should be allowed to be accompanied by a lawyer at a disciplinary hearing in circumstances where he or she is facing charges that are of such gravity that, in the event they are proven, he or she will effectively be barred from employment in the NHS. Read more.
EAT
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE:
Amendment
Enterprise Liverpool Ltd v Jonas and ors UKEAT/0112/09
Amendment permitted by the Employment Tribunal to substitute correct Claimant in a case initially brought by individual employees; under TUPE reg. 15(1)(c) the claim could only be brought by the relevant recognized trade union on a complaint of breach of reg. 13. Bearing in mind the balance of injustice and hardship the Employment Tribunal was right to allow the amendment substituting the union for the individual claimants. Read more.
UNFAIR DISMISSAL
Revd L E Vanttinen-Newton v The Geo Group UK Limited UKEAT/0113/09/ZT
The Claimant was head chaplain at an immigration removal centre. He was dismissed for giving an unauthorised interview broadcast on a local radio religious broadcast and because "there was the potential for information to be shared which may have brought the Company into disrepute or bring[ing] serious discredit to the Company."
The dismissing officer had neither heard the broadcast nor read a transcript of it. The dismissal was unfair but the Claimant had substantially contributed to it. Read more.
