30 Aug 2021
The applicant failed to demonstrate any error of law or that the Labour Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction; the Tribunal's credibility-based factual findings and discretionary costs decision were within lawful bounds, therefore leave to appeal is refused.
23 Feb 2018
The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judge's order and remitted the question of whether the addendum was supported by consideration to the Labour Tribunal for retrial because the existence of consideration depends on factual findings whether the employer obtained a practical benefit or obviated a disbenefit (applying the Williams v Roffey test); the appellate court should not substitute factual evaluation for the Tribunal.
20 Jan 2017
The Presiding Officer’s factual finding that the appellant agreed to the pay reduction was open on the evidence (witness testimony and contemporaneous emails) and supported by appellant’s initial acceptance of reduced pay; no error of law or jurisdiction was established, therefore leave to appeal was properly refused.
31 May 2016
The email exchanges did not constitute a binding variation of the written employment contract because no acceptance occurred; the employer's Email 3 constituted a final package proposal that could not be severed by the employee; the Presiding Officer's factual findings (including credibility and that discussions were deferred pending management changes) were not shown to be erroneous in law or outside jurisdiction; consequently the application for leave to appeal failed.
15 Jul 2004
The engagement letter did not contain all contractual terms; evidence of the interview and company practice/handbook showed the $7,000 target bonus was a contractual entitlement incorporated into the contract; Clause 3 of the engagement letter and the handbook did not clearly reserve a power to vary the bonus formula; therefore the Defendant had no contractual discretion to unilaterally alter the target bonus and the Presiding Officer's finding of constructive dismissal and the award were upheld.
27 Oct 2000
The former managing director had authority to approve fixed rates of allowances and commissions; plaintiffs produced payment requisition forms and credible witness evidence corroborating approval; defendant failed to produce documents or evidence to show lawful variation or to substantiate counterclaims; therefore plaintiffs are entitled to their claimed statutory benefits and approved commissions and the counterclaims fail.