Cases within A

• expand

  Adams and others v Lancashire County Council and Bet Catering Services Ltd [1996] IRLR 154 HC (1 report relating to this case)

  • Transfer of undertakings: Pension rights excluded from transfers legislation

    Date:

    15 March 2001

    The EC Business Transfers Directive excludes all pension rights (past, present and future) from the terms and conditions transferred with employees on the transfer of an undertaking, holds the High Court in Adams and others v (1) Lancashire County Council and (2) BET Catering Services Ltd.

• expand

  Adams v Colchester & East Essex Co-operative Society Ltd [2002] ET/1500093/02 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Case digest

    Date:

    1 December 2002

    Hilary Slater, consultant with Cobbetts solicitors, provides a round-up of employment tribunal decisions on discrimination.

• expand

  Adams v International Insider Publishing Co Ltd [2001] ET/2202350/01 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Additional value to the company justified difference in pay

    Date:

    1 September 2001

    A London Central tribunal (Chair: J R Hill) in Adams v International Insider Publishing Co Ltd rejects a claim for equal pay for work of equal value, after deciding that it was not necessary to appoint an independent expert as there was sufficient evidence to identify the differences between the two posts.

• expand

  Adamson v B & L Cleaning Services Ltd [1995] IRLR 193 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Unfair dismissal: Dismissal of competing employee was fair

    Date:

    1 May 1995

    An employer is entitled to expect that an employee will not compete with it for contracts with existing customers, holds the EAT in Adamson v B&L Cleaning Services Ltd.

• expand

  Adamson v Mitchells & Butlers Retail Ltd ET/1502919/09 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Pub manager fairly dismissed after his wheelie bin prank was caught on CCTV

    Date:

    7 October 2010

    An employee's workplace prank can undermine the employer's trust and confidence in him or her, and warrant summary dismissal, as this case demonstrates.

• expand

  Addison and others v Denholm Ship Management (UK) Ltd and others [1997] IRLR 389 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Transfer of undertakings: not covered by Transfer Regulations

    Date:

    1 November 1997

    The EC Business Transfers Directive and the Transfer of Undertakings Regulations do not extend territorially to cover the transfer of "flotels" servicing oil and gas installations situated in the UK sector of the North Sea continental shelf, holds the EAT in Addison and others v Denholm Ship Management (UK) Ltd and others.

• expand

  Addison Lee Ltd v Gascoigne EAT/0289/17 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Gig economy: Addison Lee courier was a worker, holds EAT

    Date:

    18 May 2018

    In Addison Lee Ltd v Gascoigne, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that a cycle courier was a worker rather than self-employed.

• expand

  Addison Lee Ltd v Lange and others EAT/0038/18 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Employment status: Private hire drivers were workers, rules EAT

    Date:

    22 November 2018

    In Addison Lee Ltd v Lange and others, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that drivers who worked within the employer's private hire business were workers rather than self-employed.

• expand

  Addison v Royal Mail Group plc [2006] ET/1401045/05 & ET/1401605/05 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Case digest

    Date:

    1 September 2006

    Tina McKevitt, lecturer in employment law at University of Sheffield, provides a round-up of employment tribunal decisions on discrimination.

• expand

  Adegbuji v Meteor Parking Ltd EAT/1570/09 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Tribunal procedure: "Fresh evidence" challenges to tribunal decisions should be dealt with by review not appeal

    Date:

    15 September 2010

    In Adegbuji v Meteor Parking Ltd EAT/1570/09, the EAT dismissed an appeal seeking to challenge a tribunal decision on the basis of fresh evidence because the claimant had failed to show that the evidence could not have been put before the tribunal at the time of the hearing. The EAT also remarked that, in general, the appropriate course for parties seeking to rely on new evidence is to apply to the tribunal for a review.