In Martland and others v Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd; Sculley and others v Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd EAT/0220/07 & EAT/0221/07, the EAT upheld the tribunal's finding that significant and adverse changes to employees' terms and conditions did not amount, on the facts, to a cessation or diminution of the employer's requirement for employees to "carry out work of a particular kind", so as to give rise to redundancy dismissals.
In Jackson v Computershare Investor Services plc  EWCA Civ 1065, the Court of Appeal ruled that the provision in the TUPE Regulations to the effect that a transferred contract of employment will have effect after the transfer as if originally made between the employee and the transferee could not be construed so as to give the employee a contractual benefit to which she had not been entitled under her original contract.
This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering enhanced redundancy payments.
In Albion Automotive Ltd v Walker and others, the Court of Appeal upholds an employment tribunal's decision that an employer who made enhanced redundancy payments according to an agreed policy for a number of years created a custom and practice from which the tribunal could infer that the employer and/or its successors intended to be contractually bound to make those payments.
There is an implied term in a contract of employment that, once an employer has determined that an employee will be dismissed by reason of redundancy, in circumstances where his or her dismissal for any other reason will defeat his or her right to enhanced contractual redundancy benefits, the employer may not lawfully dismiss him or her for any reason other than redundancy, except for good cause, the High Court holds in Jenvey v Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
An employer acted in breach of the implied contractual duty of trust and confidence when it failed to offer an employee new, enhanced contractual redundancy terms given to all other permanent employees, in the genuine but mistaken belief that he was not a permanent employee, holds the Court of Appeal in Transco plc v O'Brien.
This week's case roundup from Eversheds, covering race discrimination and redundancy.
An employer who made automatic payments of enhanced redundancy compensation to dismissed employees for over 20 years, but who reserved the scale of those payments for its management manual which was not formally distributed to the workforce, did not commit itself either expressly, or impliedly by custom and practice, to any contractual obligation to make such payments, the EAT holds in Pellowe v Pendragon plc.
In Quinn and others v Calder Industrial Materials Ltd the EAT upholds an industrial tribunal's ruling that the employer was not in breach of contract by failing to make enhanced redundancy payments to redundant employees.
An employer had no right to withdraw unilaterally its employees' contractual entitlement to enhanced redundancy payments, holds the High Court in Lee and others v GEC Plessey Telecommunications.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to enhanced redundancy pay.