Employment Judge Embarked on ‘Frolic of his Own’ – EAT Ruling

Employment judges may reconsider their initial conclusions on a case, but that does not give them licence to embark on a wholesale change of mind on the basis of arguments that have not been presented to them. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) made that point in finding that an employment…

May 03, 2023

Pexels nataliya vaitkevich 6863262 1024x683

Employment judges may reconsider their initial conclusions on a case, but that does not give them licence to embark on a wholesale change of mind on the basis of arguments that have not been presented to them. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) made that point in finding that an employment judge went on a frolic of his own.

The case concerned a senior employee of a global company who was seconded on a short-term basis to run its operations in Canada. After his commission payments – which in the past had represented the majority of his remuneration – were stopped, he resigned and launched Employment Tribunal (ET) proceedings.

Following a hearing, the ET found that his contractual entitlement to commission had expired 12 months into his secondment. Any commission payments he received thereafter were at the company’s discretion. There had been no fundamental breach of his employment contract and the employment judge rejected his complaints of constructive unfair and wrongful dismissal.

After subsequently reconsidering the matter at the employee’s behest, however, the judge reversed that outcome and upheld both complaints. He found that the company had breached the term of trust and confidence implied into the employee’s contract by the manner in which it withdrew his commission payments.

In upholding the company’s challenge to the ET’s decision, the EAT found that the judge had engaged in a frolic of his own in effectively rewriting several paragraphs of his original judgment. At the reconsideration hearing, neither side had presented argument on the point that the judge treated as decisive.

Given the public interest in the finality of litigation, the EAT found that he should not even have embarked on the process of reconsideration. In doing so, he granted the employee a second bite of the cherry, thereby causing serious prejudice to the company. The ET’s original decision dismissing the complaints was restored.

Injured Fairground Worker Succeeds in Personal Injury Claim

There are often few, if any, witnesses to accidents at work and accounts of how they occurred may differ dramatically. As a case concerning an injured fairground worker showed, however, judges are adept at weighing up the evidence before reaching conclusions as to the most likely sequence of events. The worker suffered multiple injuries to his right foot when he fell 15-20 feet whilst working on a ride. His account was that he and a manager were standing on a wet handrail, attempting to free a…

Non-Executive Directors and ‘Worker’ Status – Guideline Ruling

Can a non-executive director who receives no more than an honorarium for services that he provides voluntarily enjoy the protected status of a ‘worker’? That was the thorny issue addressed by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in a guideline case. The case concerned a professional who was appointed to a four-year non-executive directorship of a national sporting body. In Employment Tribunal (ET) proceedings, he alleged that he had been subjected to detriments for whistleblowing. His claim…

Hotel Owner Ruled Liable Following Guest’s Fatal Fall from Window

Property occupiers are obliged to take reasonable care for the safety of their visitors, but does that duty extend to those who choose to take obvious risks? The Court of Appeal addressed that issue in a guideline case concerning a hotel guest who fell out of a window to his death. The man was staying on the hotel’s second floor after attending a wedding when he fell nine metres from the sash window in the early hours of the morning. His widow sought compensation from the hotel’s owner under…