Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Employment lawDismissalEmployment tribunalsUnfair dismissal

Case of the week: Jefferson (Commercial) LLP v Westgate

by Gurpreet Duhra 22 Jan 2013
by Gurpreet Duhra 22 Jan 2013

Jefferson (Commercial) LLP v Westgate

FACTS

Mr Westgate was employed by Jefferson (Commercial) LLP from 2002. By September 2010, the employer had reason to speak to Mr Westgate about performance issues; he subsequently went off sick and issued a grievance.

The employer was unable to obtain medical information about Mr Westgate’s state of health and restricted the level of discretionary sick pay that it paid to him.

There was a meeting on 12 January 2011 to discuss the grievance, Mr Westgate’s ill health and the outstanding performance issues. At the meeting, Mr Westgate indicated that he was not prepared to return to work.

Following the meeting, the employer wrote to Mr Westgate indicating that there had been a mutual breakdown in trust and confidence.

Mr Westgate’s employment terminated on 31 January 2011 and he brought an unfair dismissal claim.

DECISION

The employment tribunal held that dismissal was on the ground of some other substantial reason. However, the employer did not act reasonably in treating that reason as a reason to dismiss because of its failure to have any further discussions with Mr Westgate following the 12 January meeting.

The employer appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).

The EAT upheld the appeal. The tribunal was wrong to hold that dismissal without a further meeting or further discussion was necessarily unfair without considering what purpose such further discussion would have had. In the circumstances, the loss of confidence was irretrievable. To have a further meeting to restate the position would be a meaningless charade. The dismissal was fair in the circumstances.

The EAT considered whether or not the use of the word “include” in the introduction to the Acas code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures (on the Acas website), which states “disciplinary situations include misconduct and/or poor performance”, suggests that “misconduct and poor performance is not a conclusive list”.

However, the EAT concluded that, in this particular case, where the relationship between the parties had irretrievably broken down: “There is nothing in our view to suggest that the code of practice had anything in particular to say in respect of the situation which the tribunal identified here”.

IMPLICATIONS

Whether a dismissal is fair or unfair depends on the particular circumstances of the case. However, cases where there has been a recognised complete breakdown in trust and confidence between the parties will be few and far between.

It is a shame that the EAT in this case did not consider further the issue of whether or not the Acas code applies to some other substantial reason (SOSR) dismissals.

In 2010, in a surprising decision, the employment tribunal in Cummings v Siemens Communications Ltd found that SOSR dismissals are covered by the Acas code because they are not expressly excluded.

The EAT in this case found that the Acas code was not applicable on the particular facts, but did not express an opinion on whether or not the Acas code applies to SOSR dismissals more generally.

Although SOSR dismissals are not expressly covered by the Acas code, the circumstances that give rise to a dismissal for SOSR will often involve discipline or performance issues. In these circumstances, it is advisable for employers to follow the provisions of the code.

Gurpreet Duhra, partner, DLA Piper








Case reports from XpertHR on the application of the Acas code to SOSR dismissals



  • Cummings v Siemens Communications Ltd ET/3500013/10 In this case, the tribunal held that the Acas code applies to dismissals for “some other substantial reason”.

Avatar
Gurpreet Duhra

previous post
Asking for a pay rise
next post
Survey highlights strategic disconnect between business leaders and HR

You may also like

Police officers who are violent towards women should...

17 Aug 2022

Uber has more drivers than ever as worker...

11 Aug 2022

Train conductor unfairly dismissed after ‘black privilege’ comment

10 Aug 2022

Former MP’s aide unfairly dismissed after whistleblowing

9 Aug 2022

‘Pushy’ lawyer awarded £152k for sex discrimination

8 Aug 2022

Top 10 HR questions July 2022: heatwaves and...

1 Aug 2022

HMRC looking to recoup £1.4bn from businesses’ use...

1 Aug 2022

Ministers release guidance to clarify UK employment status...

28 Jul 2022

Met loses appeal against reinstating senior officer

27 Jul 2022

Underpayment not reported due to ‘fear and insecurity’

25 Jul 2022
  • 6 reasons why work-based learning is better than traditional training PROMOTED | A recent Fortune/Deloitte survey found that 71% of CEOs are anticipating that this year’s biggest business disrupter...Read more
  • Strengthening Scotland’s public services through virtual recruiting PROMOTED | This website is Scotland's go-to place for job seekers looking to apply for roles in public services...Read more
  • What’s next for L&D? Enter Alchemist… PROMOTED | It’s time to turn off the tedious and get ready for interactive and immersive learning experiences...Read more
  • Simple mistakes are blighting the onboarding experience PROMOTED | The onboarding of new hires is a company’s best chance...Read more
  • Preventing Burnout: How can HR help key workers get the right help? PROMOTED | Workplace wellbeing may seem a distant memory...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2022

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2022 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+