|
|
|
|
|
RECENT CASES — HIGHLIGHTS |
|
We send email updates which detail all the recent changes that have been added to our online updates page and the online version to all subscribers. These can be accessed by clicking on the updates in the emails, by using the online updates page or by using the online version of your Memo. We have selected a few of the cases most likely in our view to have a widespread impact, and summarise these below, followed by a cumulative list of the cases covered by our 2010 updating service to date. Employment contract, variation and breach Mutual trust and confidence - test for breach of mutual trust and confidence and whether employers can cure fundamental breaches of contract See ¶¶1246, 1715 The Court of Appeal has considered the correct test for whether there has been a breach of mutual trust and confidence in this case which concerned a university lecturer whose marks were altered without consultation. The Court confirmed the EAT’s view that the range of reasonable responses test should not be used in constructive dismissal cases. The Court went on to consider whether the employer had remedied the breach by conducting an enquiry so that the lecturer was not entitled to claim constructive dismissal. It held that an employer who has committed a fundamental breach of contract cannot cure it by its subsequent actions. If the employer takes steps to put matters right after a fundamental breach this does invite the employee to affirm the contract, but the employee is under no obligation to do so and does not lose the right to accept the breach and claim constructive dismissal. However, the Court commented that an employee cannot ordinarily expect to continue working for very long without losing the option of termination, particularly if he fails to make his position clear at the outset and the employer has offered to make suitable amends. Buckland v Bournemouth University Higher Education Corp [2010] EWCA Civ 121 Discipline and grievance Disciplinary procedures – legal representation where dismissal could have greater consequences See ¶6558 The Court of Appeal held that a teaching assistant alleged to have had inappropriate contact with a student was entitled to legal representation at a disciplinary hearing on the grounds that it would have a strong influence on the decision of the Independent Safeguarding Authority as to whether he should be placed on the list of persons barred from working with children. G, R (on the application of) v X School and ors [2010] EWCA Civ 1 Equality at work Discrimination on the grounds of religion and belief - dress code requiring crosses not to be visible not discriminatory See ¶5826 The Court of Appeal has held that a dress code which forbade wearing a cross which was visible when wearing uniform was not unlawful. The claimant argued that it would be indirect discrimination if a single employee were disadvantaged. The Court rejected this argument and confirmed that the correct interpretation of the legislation was that a group of employees must be put at a disadvantage. In this case, only one employee was affected, given that it was accepted that wearing a cross was a matter of personal preference, so her claim could not succeed. The Court also disagreed with the view of the employment tribunal that the dress code would have been disproportionate. It commented that where different groups in the workforce have conflicting views on a dress code a blanket ban may in some cases be the only fair solution. Eweida v British Airways Plc [2010] EWCA Civ 80 Transfer of the business Collective agreements - employer will not be bound by changes negotiated after transfer See ¶7985 The Court of Appeal has reversed the approach to be taken where contracts of employment which contain terms negotiated by collective agreement are transferred under TUPE. It held that the ECJ decision in Werhof v Freeway Traffic Systems GmbH & Co KG meant that a transferee will not be bound by changes to a collective agreement negotiated after the transfer date. This includes variations to existing collective agreements which are agreed after the transfer date. Parkwood Leisure Ltd v Alemo-Herron and ors [2010] EWCA Civ 24 Ending employment Constructive dismissal - employee already in breach of contract cannot claim constructive dismissal See ¶8230 In this case, an employee resigned and claimed constructive dismissal while he was under investigation for a number of disciplinary offences, including sexual harassment, drunkenness at work and breaches of confidentiality. He was successful in his claim for unfair dismissal in the employment tribunal. The EAT overturned the decision, finding that the tribunal had failed to take proper account of the claimant’s own breaches of contract. It held that he was not entitled to terminate his contract on the ground of the employer’s conduct toward him, as he was himself in breach of the duty of trust and confidence before the acts he complained of took place. Aberdeen City Council v McNeill [2009] UKEAT 0037_08_1011 |
|
VAT Memo 2010-2011, to be published in April, has been fully revised and updated for the Budget 2010 announcements, and will include commentary on the following: - restitution of the VAT rate to 17.5% - new place of supply rules for cross-border services - TOMS changes - new tribunal and appeals system. |
|
Be on top of the latest changes with VAT Memo 2010-2011 |
|
OUT IN APRIL |
|
Benefits: Book and online / 100% reader-friendly / Regularly updated |