header-logo header-logo

Employment—Unfair dismissal—Date of dismissal

21 October 2010
Issue: 7438 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

Gisda Cyf v Barratt [2010] UKSC 41, [2010] All ER (D) 124 (Oct)

Supreme Court Lord Hope DP, Lord Saville, Lord Walker, Lady Hale and Lord Kerr SCJJ, 13 Oct 2010

Under the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996), the effective date of termination of employment is when the employee is informed of the dismissal or when the employee has had a reasonable opportunity of discovering that she has been dismissed. Consideration of the behaviour of the employee should be included in an assessment of whether the employee has had a reasonable opportunity to find out about the dismissal.

Paul Greatorex (instructed by Richard C Hall & partners) for the appellant The respondent did not appear and was not represented..

In October 2006, the respondent was suspended from her employment. A disciplinary hearing was held on 28 November 2006. At the end of the hearing, the respondent was told that she could expect to receive a letter on 30 November informing her of the outcome of the hearing (the decision letter). On 30 November, however,

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll