header-logo header-logo

28 June 2007 / Suzanne Palmer
Issue: 7279 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Objecting conscientiously

Suzanne Palmer discusses the clash between breach of contract claims and statutory grievance procedures

There has been much discussion about the various problems, amounting to a technical minefield for the unwary, posed by the practical application of the statutory dispute resolution mechanism instigated by the Employment Act 2002 (EA 2002) and the Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/752) (the regulations). This article examines a problem apparently unique to breach of contract claims brought under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 (SI 1994/1623) (the order) and the combined effect of EA 2002 and the regulations on such claims.

BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIMS

EA 2002, ss 31 and 32 are both predicated on the premise that one of the statutory procedures applies. The next point of reference here is the regulations, which state (in reg 2) that “applicable statutory procedure” means “the statutory procedure that applies by virtue of these Regulations”. Regulation 3 sets out the circumstances in which the statutory disciplinary procedure (SDP) applies—where the employer contemplates dismissal

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

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll