Employment Law Cases - Free Case Database - Help With Law Essays, Law Dissertations and Law Coursework

Case Law Database - Free Law Cases:

jump to case? Jump Down To Case?

Are You Writing a Law Essay?

Perhaps you are currently struggling with a dissertation or piece of coursework? Law Teacher provides students with hundreds of resources to make academic life so much easier! The case law database you are currently viewing is one such resource, but why not purchase a custom essay for guaranteed success?! Our researchers have access to thousands of cases similar to this one. So stop struggling - Order a Custom Essay Today!

Case Law : Company | Contract | Criminal | Employment | Equity | EU | Land | Tort | Other

case law

Acco (UK) Ltd v Monge


[2002] All ER (D) 439 (Oct)


Court: EAT

Judgment Date: 29/08/2002






EMPLOYMENT - UNFAIR DISMISSAL - REASON FOR DISMISSAL - RANGE OF REASONABLE RESPONSES TEST

The appellant employer employed the respondent employee as a marketing manager. The employment contract between the parties set out a detailed absence procedure that required an employee to give appropriate notice if he was to be absent. Subsequently, the employee took a number of flying lessons during working hours and failed to obtain consent or give notice to his superiors. In May 2000, the employee was suspended and disciplinary proceedings were instigated. Following the disciplinary proceedings, the employee was summarily dismissed. After an unsuccessful internal appeal, the employee presented his complaint of unfair dismissal to the employment tribunal. The tribunal found, inter alia, that the employee had been unfairly dismissed, and the employer appealed.
Held - The appeal would be allowed.The employment tribunal's views in relation to the adequacy of the investigation could not be supported. It failed to consider the material that was before the employer when the decision to dismiss was taken. It ignored the employer's reasons for dismissing the employee and in effect substituted its own views. Had the tribunal correctly directed itself it could only have come to the conclusion that the response of the employer in summarily dismissing the employee was well within the band of reasonable responses. Any other decision by the tribunal would, on the facts of the instant case, have been perverse.