Case report round-up: Implied term meant enhanced redundancy payment was conditional on compromise agreement

XpertHR's latest case reports cover:

Tribunal jurisdiction: Teachers employed abroad by Government can bring unfair dismissal claims in Great Britain In Duncombe and others v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families [2011] IRLR 498 SC, the Supreme Court held that the employment of teachers seconded to European Schools on successive fixed-term contracts was objectively justified. However, the teachers could bring unfair dismissal claims in Great Britain in respect of the non-renewal of those contracts, even though they worked wholly abroad. (Employment Review)
Contracts of employment: Existence of implied term requiring entry into compromise agreement to receive enhanced redundancy payment In Garratt v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2011] IRLR 591 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an employee's contract contained an implied term that an enhanced redundancy payment would be made only if he signed a compromise agreement. (Employment Review)
Unfair dismissal: Employee was not "self-dismissed" In Zulhayir v JJ Food Service Ltd EAT/0593/10, the EAT held that an employee was not "self-dismissed" when, after moving house and failing to notify his employer of his new address, he failed to reply to a letter from the employer stating that, if he did not contact it by a specified date, it would conclude that he had terminated his contract of employment. (Personnel Today)

Also

Was this article helpful?