Dismissal: Imposition of radically altered terms may amount to dismissal
This report relates to 1 case(s)
Southwark London Borough v Mungul EAT/1359/99 (0 other reports)
In London Borough of Southwark v Mungul 3.11.00 EAT 1359/99, the EAT holds that an employment tribunal erred in law by holding that a fundamental breach of contract invariably leads to a dismissal as a matter of course. Although the imposition of radically different terms without consent may effectively amount to a withdrawal of the old contract - and, hence, to a dismissal - and re-employment on new terms, whether this has, in fact, occurred depends on a careful assessment of the surrounding circumstances. It may be that the employer has instead acted in repudiatory breach of contract, which may be waived by the employee continuing to work under the new terms without complaint.