Rose v Dodd

Rose v Dodd

The intervention by the Law Society and the suspension of the practising certificate did not, as a matter of law, automatically terminate Mrs Rose’s contract of employment. There was no act of dismissal by Mr Dodd, and Mrs Rose continued to work and be paid after the intervention. Therefore, her contract of employment subsisted until the transfer of the practice, at which point TUPE applied and liabilities transferred to the new firm. Mrs Rose has no claim for redundancy or other payments against Mr Dodd.

Parties
Appellant: Joanne Rose; Respondent: Ian Wilfred Dodd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Redundancy, Dismissal, Transfer of Undertakings (tupe), Solicitors Act Intervention, Employment Rights
Employment Law Partnership Law Redundancy Dismissal Transfer of Undertakings (tupe) Solicitors Act Intervention Employment Rights

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joanne Rose

Appellant

Ian Wilfred Dodd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does intervention by the Law Society in a solicitor’s practice automatically terminate contracts of employment?
  2. 2 Is an employee entitled to redundancy payments following such intervention?
  3. 3 Does TUPE apply to the transfer of a solicitor’s practice after intervention?

Ratio Decidendi

The intervention by the Law Society and the suspension of the practising certificate did not, as a matter of law, automatically terminate Mrs Rose’s contract of employment. There was no act of dismissal by Mr Dodd, and Mrs Rose continued to work and be paid after the intervention. Therefore, her contract of employment subsisted until the transfer of the practice, at which point TUPE applied and liabilities transferred to the new firm. Mrs Rose has no claim for redundancy or other payments against Mr Dodd.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No error of law in the employment tribunal’s decision
  • Mrs Rose’s claims against Mr Dodd for redundancy and other payments are dismissed