Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Case lawEmployment law

Case round-up: top cases of the past 12 months

by Personnel Today 17 Sep 2007
by Personnel Today 17 Sep 2007

Tarbuck v Sainsbury’s Supermarkets The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) confirmed that a failure to consult a disabled employee about reasonable adjustments does not in itself amount to a failure to make reasonable adjustments.

O’Hanlon v HM Revenue & Customs The Court of Appeal (CA) confirmed that the employer was not obliged to continue paying sick pay to O’Hanlon, who was disabled, once her sick pay entitlement had run out. It would be a rare case where extra pay to a disabled employee amounts to a reasonable adjustment. However, where the employer has contributed to the employee’s ill health by failing to make reasonable adjustments, an employee may recover compensation for loss of sick pay (Nottingham County Council v Meikle).

McAdie v Royal Bank of Scotland The CA held that an employer can fairly dismiss an employee for incapacity, even in circumstances where the employer has caused or contributed to their ill health. However, the employer must ‘go the extra mile’ before dismissing in such cases.

Intel Corporation (UK) Limited v Daw The CA held that the mere fact that an employer provides a confidential counselling service to employees does not discharge it of its duty of care in all cases. Whether or not the duty is discharged will depend on all of the facts of each case.

St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council v Derbyshire and others The House of Lords held that letters sent by the council to employees warning them of serious consequences for the organisation if their equal pay claims were successful amounted to victimisation under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. The letters were sent to put pressure on the claimants to settle, and were effectively a threat. While an employer may make honest and reasonable attempts to settle a claim, the council had gone too far in this case.

Cadman v Health and Safety Executive The European Court of Justice held that it is not generally necessary for an employer to objectively justify a difference in pay between men and women as a result of using length of service as a criterion in determining pay, even where this results in disparate pay between men and women employed in the same or similar work. However, employees will be able to challenge this pay practice where evidence raises ‘serious doubts’ that length of service achieves the objective of rewarding experience which enables the employee to perform their duties better.

Blundell v the governing body of St Andrew’s Catholic Primary School The EAT said that Blundell, a primary school teacher, had been offered the ‘same job’ when she returned from maternity leave and was allocated to a different class. The EAT said that a woman returning from maternity leave should come back to a work situation as near as possible to the one she left, and that it is up to the tribunal to define that job based on the evidence.

Commerzbank AG v Keen The CA held that the bank had a very wide discretion in deciding what bonus to award, and that to make out his case, Keen would have to show that no rational City bank would have awarded him a similar bonus. This case set a high hurdle for employees when challenging bonus decisions. The CA also confirmed that the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 does not apply to bonus provisions in a contract of employment.

Airbus UK v Webb The EAT decided that an expired disciplinary warning cannot be relied upon by an employer for any purposes, and a tribunal is obliged, and not merely entitled, to ignore expired warnings.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Babula v Waltham Forest College The CA held that an employee who holds an honest but mistaken belief that he is disclosing a breach of a legal obligation is protected by the whistleblowing legislation. Provided that the tribunal considers the employee’s belief is reasonable, the fact that the belief subsequently turns out to be wrong is irrelevant. In coming to its decision, the CA reversed the EAT’s previous decision in Kraus v Penna.

Judith Harris, professional support lawyer, Addleshaw Goddard

Personnel Today

Personnel Today articles are written by an expert team of award-winning journalists who have been covering HR and L&D for many years. Some of our content is attributed to "Personnel Today" for a number of reasons, including: when numerous authors are associated with writing or editing a piece; or when the author is unknown (particularly for older articles).

previous post
AUDIO: Personnel Today Friday Podcast
next post
Whitehall HR failings over unfair dismissals cost £628,632 in 2006-07

You may also like

Construction workers win compensation claim against defunct employer

9 May 2025

Zero-hours workers’ rights to be extended from beyond...

8 May 2025

Employment tribunal backlog up 23% in a year

7 May 2025

Ministers urged to outlaw misuse of NDAs

7 May 2025

‘Unacceptable to question integrity’ of Supreme Court judgment

2 May 2025

Employment Rights Bill must be tightened to protect...

1 May 2025

Lords criticise ‘opaque’, ‘on-the-hoof’ Employment Rights Bill

30 Apr 2025

Retail HRDs say Employment Rights Bill will have...

29 Apr 2025

Trans ex-judge to appeal Supreme Court biological sex...

29 Apr 2025

EHRC: Interim update on single-sex spaces draws criticism

28 Apr 2025

  • 2025 Employee Communications Report PROMOTED | HR and leadership...Read more
  • The Majority of Employees Have Their Eyes on Their Next Move PROMOTED | A staggering 65%...Read more
  • Prioritising performance management: Strategies for success (webinar) WEBINAR | In today’s fast-paced...Read more
  • Self-Leadership: The Key to Successful Organisations PROMOTED | Eletive is helping businesses...Read more
  • Retaining Female Talent: Four Ways to Reduce Workplace Drop Out PROMOTED | International Women’s Day...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 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+