header-logo header-logo

Employment

05 March 2010
Issue: 7407 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Buckland v Bournemouth University Higher Education Corporation [2010] EWCA Civ 121, [2010] All ER (D) 299 (Feb)

The test for assessing a claim for constructive dismissal did not include an assessment of the “range of reasonable responses” on the part of the employer when determining whether or not the employer was in fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence in addition to its application when assessing the fairness of the employer’s conduct.

The test for breach of a fundamental term of the contract was an objective one. Although reasonableness might be a tool in the employment tribunal’s factual analysis kit for the determination of whether there had been a fundamental breach, it could not be a legal requirement.
 

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

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

London promotion underscores firm’s investment in white collar and investigations

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Private client team strengthened by partner appointment

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

Kate Gaskell, CEO of Flex Legal, reflects on chasing her childhood dreams underscores the importance of welcoming those from all backgrounds into the profession

NEWS
Overcrowded prisons, mental health hospitals and immigration centres are failing to meet international and domestic human rights standards, the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has warned
Two speedier and more streamlined qualification routes have been launched for probate and conveyancing professionals
Workplace stress was a contributing factor in almost one in eight cases before the employment tribunal last year, indicating its endemic grip on the UK workplace
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll