A recent tribunal ruling means it is highly likely there will be more claims for unfair dismissal from people over the age of 65. By Jill Kelly, an associate with Clarks Employment Team, Reading.
Employees over 65 years of age have won the right to claim for unfair dismissal and redundancy payments as the result of two linked employment tribunal rulings.
This week's case roundup from Eversheds, covering race discrimination and redundancy.
This week's case roundup from Eversheds, covering redundancy rights and risk assessment.
An employee was not barred by the principle of estoppel from pursuing a claim for damages for breach of contract in the High Court, notwithstanding that his claim for damages for the same alleged breach of contract previously brought in the employment tribunal had been dismissed when he withdrew that claim, holds the Court of Appeal in Sajid v Sussex Muslim Society.
In BG plc v O'Brien, the EAT holds that an employer was in breach of contract when it denied an employee the benefit of a contractual redundancy package because it had not appreciated that his employment status was that of a "permanent" employee.
In Harvest Town Circle Ltd v Rutherford the EAT has allowed an appeal against a finding that the exclusion of employees age 65 and over from the right not to be unfairly dismissed or to receive a redundancy payment is indirectly discriminatory against men and contrary to Article 141 of the EU Treaty.
An employee who had seriously injured his hand and had not worked for some years was not entitled to a redundancy payment when his employer went into receivership as his contract had been frustrated by his ill health, holds the EAT in Collins v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to redundancy payments.