This is a preview. To continue reading please log in or Register to read this article

Misconduct: Ambiguous written warning interpreted against employer

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand disabled

    Bevan Ashford v Malin [1995] IRLR 360 EAT (0 other reports)

In Bevan Ashford v Malin, the EAT holds that a final written warning to an employee, which stated that it would remain on his personal file for a period of 12 months from the date of the warning, should be construed strictly against the employer. Consequently, an employee who was dismissed for misconduct which occurred on the anniversary of the date of the warning was not at that time still subject to the warning. The industrial tribunal had been entitled to find the dismissal unfair.