enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Thomas Wragg & Sons Ltd v Wood - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Wragg_&_Sons_Ltd_v_Wood

    Lord McDonald in the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the Tribunal was right. Mr Wood's reasons were that he had committed himself to another job, that he was wary about future layoffs if he stayed with this employer, and that the offer of alternative employment was late in the day. All these, but especially the third reason, were important ...

  3. Employment tribunal - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_tribunal

    Employment tribunals are tribunal public bodies in both England and Wales and Scotland that have statutory jurisdiction to hear disputes between employers and employees. [1]The most common disputes are concerned with unfair dismissal, redundancy payments and employment discrimination.

  4. Redundancy in United Kingdom law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redundancy_in_United...

    In 2002, the Court of Appeal ruled in a case brought by staff employed at Albion's Farington site in Lancashire, Albion Automotive Ltd w. Walker and others, [1] that a contractual term entitling employees to an enhanced redundancy payment could be implied into the employees' contracts of employment based on the employer's custom and practice.

  5. Unfair dismissal in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfair_dismissal_in_the...

    An Industrial Tribunal (IT, now known as an Employment Tribunal) held that there was a substantial reason justifying dismissal, and by a majority the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld this decision. However, the Court of Appeal disagreed, stating that in deciding whether Burns had acted reasonably, the tribunal needed to consider whether an ...

  6. Abernethy v Mott, Hay and Anderson - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abernethy_v_Mott,_Hay_and...

    The wrong label of 'redundancy' does not affect the point. The second point is whether the reason here was such as to justify the dismissal. Under section 24(2)(a) a reason would be sufficient if it 'related to the capability or qualifications of the employee for performing work of the kind which he was employed by the employer to do.'

  7. Nelson v BBC (No 2) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_v_BBC_(No_2)

    The Court of Appeal applied a "contract test" to the question of redundancy: whether an employee was redundant was to be determined by reference to the terms (explicit or implied) in their employment contract. This, along with the "function test" was subsequently rejected by the House of Lords in Murray v Foyle Meats Ltd. [3

  8. AOL Mail

    mail.aol.com

    Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!

  9. Employment Rights Act 1996 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Rights_Act_1996

    The reasons laid out that an employer can dismiss are in s.98(2). Fair reasons to dismiss an employee are if it, (a) relates to the capability or qualifications of the employee for performing work of the kind which he or she was employed by the employer to do, (b) relates to the conduct of the employee, (c) is that the employee was redundant, or