In Agarwal v Cardiff University and another; Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive t/a Nexus v Anderson and others, the Court of Appeal held that employment tribunals have jurisdiction to construe contractual terms in the context of a claim for unlawful deductions from wages.
In Roddis v Sheffield Hallam University, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that a lecturer employed under a zero hours contract was employed under the same type of contract as a permanent full-time lecturer for the purposes of his claim of less favourable treatment under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 (SI 2000/1551).
In Abrahall and others v Nottingham City Council and another, the Court of Appeal held that a number of employees who had continued to work without protest throughout a two-year pay freeze had not agreed to a variation of their contracts of employment.
In Tillman v Egon Zehnder, the Court of Appeal held that a six-month non-compete clause that prevented the employee from being "concerned or interested in any business carried on in competition" after termination of employment was unenforceable as it would bar her from being a shareholder in a competing business.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that the employer acted in breach of the implied term to maintain trust and confidence by giving a misleading reason for the employee's dismissal.
The High Court has held that an employee had no reasonable expectation of privacy when he used his employer's computer system to create,and transmit, personal email correspondence in the course of his employment.
The High Court has held that the suspension of a teacher was a "knee-jerk" reaction and in breach of the implied term of trust and confidence between the employer and employee.
An employment tribunal has awarded £25,000 for breach of contract to an apprentice whose contract of apprenticeship, which was due to run for four years, was terminated after less than two years.
In Adesokan v Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd [2017] IRLR 346 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an employee's negligent failure to act constituted gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal.