 |
| Thomas & Betts Manufacturing Ltd v Harding | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Court of Appeal of England and Wales |
| Citation | [1980] IRLR 255 |
| Keywords | |
| Redundancy | |
Thomas & Betts Manufacturing Ltd v Harding [1980] IRLR 255 is a UK labour law case, regarding redundancy.
| |
| Thomas & Betts Manufacturing Ltd v Harding | |
|---|---|
| | |
| Court | Court of Appeal of England and Wales |
| Citation | [1980] IRLR 255 |
| Keywords | |
| Redundancy | |
Thomas & Betts Manufacturing Ltd v Harding [1980] IRLR 255 is a UK labour law case, regarding redundancy.
Ms Harding was a packer, and also worked on a production line. The production line was closed and she was dismissed for redundancy. She claimed there was still work for packers, and if needed, one who had not worked so long should be dismissed instead, so the dismissal was unfair.
Court of Appeal upheld the Tribunal’s decision that the dismissal was unfair.
 | This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (February 2015) |
In United Kingdom law, the concept of wrongful dismissal refers exclusively to dismissal contrary to the contract of employment, which effectively means premature termination, either due to insufficient notice or lack of grounds. Although wrongful dismissal is usually associated with lack of notice sometimes it can also be caused by arbitrary dismissal where no notice was required but certain grounds were specified in the contract as being the only ones available but none existed.
Unfair dismissal in the United Kingdom is the part of UK labour law that requires fair, just and reasonable treatment by employers in cases where a person's job could be terminated. The Employment Rights Act 1996 regulates this by saying that employees are entitled to a fair reason before being dismissed, based on their capability to do the job, their conduct, whether their position is economically redundant, on grounds of a statute, or some other substantial reason. It is automatically unfair for an employer to dismiss an employee, regardless of length of service, for becoming pregnant, or for having previously asserted certain specified employment rights. Otherwise, an employee must have worked for two years. This means an employer only terminates an employee's job lawfully if the employer follows a fair procedure, acts reasonably and has a fair reason.
The Transfer of Undertakings Regulations 2006 known colloquially as TUPE and pronounced TU-pee, are the United Kingdom's implementation of the European Union Transfer of Undertakings Directive. They are also used in Ireland. It is an important part of UK labour law, protecting employees whose business is being transferred to another business. The 2006 regulations replace the old 1981 regulations which implemented the original Directive. The law has been amended in 2014 and 2018, and various provisions within the 2006 Regulations have altered.
A severance package is pay and benefits that employees may be entitled to receive when they leave employment at a company unwillfully. In addition to their remaining regular pay, it may include some of the following:
The Employment Rights Act 1996 is a United Kingdom Act of Parliament passed by the Conservative government to codify existing law on individual rights in UK labour law.
The New Zealand Employment Relations Act 2000 is a statute of the Parliament of New Zealand. It was substantially amended by the Employment Relations Amendment Act 2001 and by the ERAA 2004.
Taylor v Connex South Eastern Ltd (5.7.2000) Appeal No: EAT/1243/99, is a UK labour law case, concerning the TUPE Regulations.
Cairns v Visteon UK Ltd (2006) is a United Kingdom labour law case, regarding the scope of protection available to agency workers.*
Ford v Warwickshire CC [1983] 2 AC 71 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Williams v Compair Maxam Ltd [1982] ICR 156 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, now governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd [1987] UKHL 8 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, now governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
In labour law, unfair dismissal is an act of employment termination made without good reason or contrary to the country's specific legislation.
Lesney Products & Co v Nolan [1976] EWCA Civ 8 is a UK labour law case concerning redundancy.
Hollister v National Farmers’ Union [1979] ICR 542 is a UK labour law case concerning redundancy and unfair dismissal.
Port of London Authority v Payne [1993] EWCA Civ 26 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal and the remedy of reinstatement.
High Table Ltd v Horst [1997] EWCA Civ 2000 is a UK labour law case, concerning redundancy in English Law in the Court of Appeal, the highest court within the Senior Courts of England and Wales, and second only to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.
Catamaran Cruisers Ltd v Williams [1994] IRLR 384 is a UK labour law case, concerning redundancy.
Abernethy v Mott, Hay and Anderson [1974] ICR 323 is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal.
In French Labour Law a Dismissal is the breach of the employment contract by the employer. French Labour Law stipulates that an employment contract can be terminated by either of the parties. The 2008 reform of Labour Law introduced the possibility of a negotiated termination.
Unfair dismissal in Australia is the right to not be unfairly dismissed from work in the Fair Work Act 2009. This is a core part of Australian labour law, and refers to an unlawful act of employment termination due to it being an unfair action on the employee by the employer.