-
expand
Banerjee v City & East London Area Health Authority [1979] IRLR 147 EAT
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 18 July 1979
The Court of Appeal held, in Hollister v National Farmers' Union, that Mr Hollister's dismissal for refusing to accept the terms of a re-organisation amounted to some other substantial reason for dismissal. And in Banerjee v City & East London AHA, the EAT overturned an Industrial Tribunal's decision that Mr Banerjee's dismissal from his post of part-time consultant surgeon following a decision to replace part-timers with full-timers was for some other substantial reason.
-
expand
Bangs v Connex South Eastern Ltd [2005] IRLR 389 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Bangura v Southern Cross Healthcare Group plc and another EAT/0432/12
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 1 July 2013
David Malamatenios is a partner, and Colin Makin, Krishna Santra, Sandra Martins and Melissa Powys-Rodrigues are solicitors at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.
-
expand
Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (in compulsory liquidation) v Ali and others (No.3) [1999] IRLR 508 HC
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 15 September 1999
In Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (in compulsory liquidation) v Ali and others (No.3), the High Court holds that BCCI's dishonest conduct was sufficiently serious to amount to a breach by the bank of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence in the contracts of employment of all its former employees.
-
expand
Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (in liquidation) v Ali and others (No 3) [2002] IRLR 460 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 21 February 2003
In Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (in liquidation) v Ali and others (No.3), the Court of Appeal holds that, where a claimant alleges that stigma resulting from his or her previous employment affected his or her employment prospects, it was for him or her to prove that the stigma had a real or substantial effect on his or her obtaining employment.
-
expand
Banks v Ministry of Defence ET/3304560/2009
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Barber and others v RJB Mining (UK) Ltd [1999] IRLR 308 HC
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 1 April 1999
In making the Working Time Regulations, Parliament intended that all contracts of employment must be read so as to provide that an employee should work no more than an average of 48 hours per week during any 17-week reference period, holds the High Court in Barber and others v RJB Mining (UK) Ltd.
-
expand
Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance Group [1990] IRLR 240 ECJ
(2 reports relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 2 March 2007
This article looks at some of the significant judgments in the area of equal pay over the past year and their implications.
-
- Date:
- 19 June 1990
The European Court of Justice holds that occupational pensions payable under a contracted-out scheme constitute "pay" under Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome, and so must be offered to men and women on equal terms.
-
expand
Barbulescu v Romania [2016] IRLR 235 ECHR
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 19 January 2016
In this Romanian case, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) accepted that the employee's right to a private life had been affected when his employer accessed his Yahoo messages. However, the ECHR went on to hold that the employer's actions were justified in the circumstances and not in breach of art. 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
-
expand
Barbulescu v Romania [2017] IRLR 1032 ECHR
(2 reports relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 31 December 2017
In Barbulescu v Romania [2017] IRLR 1032 ECHR, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights held that the Romanian courts failed to afford adequate protection to the art.8 rights of an employee who sought to challenge his dismissal following a monitoring exercise by his employer.
-
- Date:
- 6 September 2017
In this Romanian case, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has held that monitoring the employee's private use of a business messaging account amounted to a breach of his right to private life and correspondence under art.8.