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

Contracts of employment: No mobility clause in shop worker's contract

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand disabled

    Aparau v Iceland Frozen Foods plc [1996] IRLR 119 EAT (0 other reports)

In Aparau v Iceland Frozen Foods plc [1996] IRLR 119 the EAT overturns an industrial tribunal's decision that there was an express or implied term in an employee's contract of employment entitling the employer to move her, against her will, from one branch of its food stores to another. The employee could not be taken to have accepted a new mobility clause merely because she continued to work without raising any formal objection to the proposed variation to her contract. The EAT also holds that the mobility clause could not properly be implied into the contract, either on grounds of necessity, or on the basis that both parties, acting reasonably, would have thought it obvious at the outset to include the term.