Employment Tribunals
Some Other Substantial Reason (SOSR) Dismissal 18 April 2017
Is there a particularly high threshold for an employer dismissing an employee because of a 'substantial reason'?
No, held the EAT in Ssekisonge v Barts Health NHS Trust , rejecting the Claimant's appeal against a finding that her dismissal was fair.
The Claimant was a nurse who, having come to the UK, obtained indefinite leave to remain and then British citizenship, had her citizenship revoked when the Home Office had concerns over her true identity. However, her leave to remain (and work) in the UK was unaffected. The Trust dismissed the Claimant after a disciplinary process relating to concerns over her identity and her conduct. The employment tribunal found that the principal reason for dismissal was that the Trust could not be certain of the Claimant's identity. It was fair for a 'substantial reason' (SOSR); given the Claimant's role, certainty as to her identity was essential. The EAT rejected an argument that a 'no fault' SOSR dismissal, there was a particularly high threshold for employers to make dismissal reasonable. The EAT noted case law that in such circumstances employers should not be expected to investigate too far beyond what official information they reasonably obtain about an employee from a responsible public authority, but it did note that the position on fairness might differ on different facts, e.g. a case not involving a nurse and an NHS Trust.
With thanks to Daniel Barnett’s employment law bulletin for providing this update.
Back to Contents
£25,000 for early termination of apprenticeship contract 19 April 2017
An employment tribunal has awarded £25,000 for breach of contract to an employee whose apprenticeship was ended early.
Reported by Personnel Today , in the case of Kinnear v Marley Eternit Ltd t/a Marley Contract Services , the employment tribunal awarded a roof tiler £25,000 over the breach of his contract of apprenticeship.
Mr Kinnear became an apprentice roof tiler with Marley Eternit in October 2014. His contract of apprenticeship was due to run until November 2018.
In June 2016, he was advised that there had been a downturn in business and that his employment was being terminated on the basis of redundancy. His appeal against dismissal was rejected.
Mr Kinnear brought a claim for breach of contract in an employment tribunal. The company did not enter a defence to the employment tribunal claim.
In upholding Mr Kinnear’s claim, the tribunal noted that he had 122 weeks left to run on his apprenticeship. It assessed that he would have been paid £24,217 for the remainder of his apprenticeship.
The tribunal acknowledged that the lack of a roofing qualification might disadvantage him in the labour market for a number of years to come.
While the employment tribunal did not assess in detail Mr Kinnear’s potential future loss of earnings, it accepted that his losses were likely to reach at least £25,000 (the maximum an employment tribunal can award for breach of contract).
You can read the full details of the case on GOV.UK - Kinnear v Marley Eternit Ltd t/a Marley Contract Services .
Back to Contents
The Chartered Institute of Payroll Professionals
Policy News Journal
cipp.org.uk
Page 20 of 145
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker