This is a preview. To continue reading please log in or Register to read this article

Compensation: Refusing alternative employment leads to Polkey reduction

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand disabled

    Lambe v 186K Ltd [2004] All ER (D) 532 (Jul) CA (0 other reports)

Key points

In Lambe v 186K Ltd, the Court of Appeal holds:

  • Where an employee was selected for redundancy and was offered suitable alternative employment (albeit pursuant to a defective selection and consultation process), the fact of the employee's refusal to accept that offer entitled a tribunal to, in the circumstances, restrict any unfair dismissal compensation to a period sufficient for adequate consultation, on the basis of Polkey.
  • Attempting to separate defects in the employer's behaviour as "procedural" or "substantive", in deciding whether the outcome would have been the same without them, is unnecessary and unproductive. The tribunal simply has to judge in an impressionistic manner whether the employer's failures made any difference to the outcome.
  • When an appellant, whose case is dismissed by the EAT at a preliminary hearing, appeals against that decision to the Court of Appeal, that Court will hear the appeal in the normal way and will either dismiss it, allow it or may impose its own order. If it remits the decision it will be to the employment tribunal rather than the EAT.