-
expand
Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust v Corbin EAT/0163/16 & EAT/0164/16
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Post Office v Adekeye (No.2) EAT/625/94
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Post Office v Foley; HSBC Bank plc (formerly Midland Bank plc) v Madden [2000] IRLR 827 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 1 November 2000
Both the "band or range of reasonable responses" approach to the issue of the reasonableness or unreasonableness of a dismissal and the tripartite "Burchell test" remain binding on the Court of Appeal, as well as on employment tribunals and the EAT, holds the Court of Appeal in Post Office v Foley and HSBC Bank plc (formerly Midland Bank plc) v Madden.
-
expand
Postcastle Properties Ltd v Perridge [1985] 276 EG 1063 CA
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 31 December 1985
In Postcastle Properties Ltd v Perridge [1985] 276 EG 1063 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an occupier of premises who had been the employee of the then owners when his occupation began was a tenant. Whether or not he had originally been granted a tenancy or a licence, the evidence showed the grant by the subsequent owners of a service tenancy.
-
expand
Pothecary Witham Weld and another v Bullimore and another and the Equality and Human Rights Commission [2010] IRLR 572 EAT
(2 reports relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 1 November 2010
Annabel Mackay, managing associate at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
-
- Date:
- 1 May 2010
Richard Ryan, associate, Helen Ward, associate, and Tori O'Neil, trainee solicitor, Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
-
expand
Potter v Hunt Contracts Ltd [1992] IRLR 108 EAT
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Potter v North Cumbria Acute NHS Trust ET September 2006
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Poulton v Walton [1998] ET/1805515/97
(1 report relating to this case)
-
- Date:
- 31 December 1997
In Poulton v Walton [1998] ET/1805515/97, the employment tribunal found that an employee with diabetes controlled by diet was disabled. Diet was a 'measure' taken to treat the diabetes so the effect of following the diet had to be ignored in considering whether he was disabled. He was not discriminated against in respect of his disability since the dismissal was not for a reason related to his disability.
-
expand
Powell v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions ET/1300163/2015
(1 report relating to this case)
-
expand
Power and another v CDS Superstores International Ltd ET/2104109/10 & ET/2104110/10
(1 report relating to this case)