Allen & Ors v TRW Systems Ltd

Allen & Ors v TRW Systems Ltd

The redundancy policy, properly construed, required payment of only three elements, not four. Past instances of paying four elements did not establish a binding legal obligation or custom, as they were consistent with a mistaken understanding of the policy. There was no error of law by the tribunals below in so finding.

Parties
Appellants: Allen & Ors; Respondent: TRW Systems Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; parties to bear their own costs as per settlement.
Legal Topics
Redundancy Payments, Contractual Interpretation, Employment Policy, Custom and Practice
Employment Law Redundancy Payments Contractual Interpretation Employment Policy Custom and Practice

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allen & Ors

Appellants

TRW Systems Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer was obliged to pay an enhanced redundancy payment beyond statutory entitlement
  2. 2 Whether the redundancy policy required payment of three or four elements
  3. 3 Whether past practice created a binding legal obligation to pay four elements

Ratio Decidendi

The redundancy policy, properly construed, required payment of only three elements, not four. Past instances of paying four elements did not establish a binding legal obligation or custom, as they were consistent with a mistaken understanding of the policy. There was no error of law by the tribunals below in so finding.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal dismissed; parties to bear their own costs as per settlement.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Cross-appeal dismissed