Atlas Cleaning Ltd v. Liversidge & Ors [2008] UKEAT 0043_07_0204 (2 April 2008)

Atlas Cleaning Ltd v. Liversidge & Ors [2008] UKEAT 0043_07_0204 (2 April 2008)

The Tribunal erred in law by failing to apply the correct test for reasonableness under section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, misapprehending the employer's obligations regarding TUPE, and making findings unsupported by evidence. The employer's actions fell within the range of reasonable responses, and the dismissals were fair.

Citation
[2008] UKEAT 0043_07_0204
Parties
Advocate for Appellants: Miss M Anderson; Appellants/respondents' Employer: Peninsula Business Services Ltd; Advocate for Respondents/claimants: Mr A Hutcheson; Respondents/claimants: Claimants (three cleaners)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
02 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Tribunal's judgment set aside; finding of fair dismissal substituted.
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Reasonableness of Dismissal, Alternative Employment Offers, TUPE (transfer of Undertakings), Procedural Fairness
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Reasonableness of Dismissal Alternative Employment Offers TUPE (transfer of Undertakings) Procedural Fairness

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Miss M Anderson

Advocate for Appellants

Peninsula Business Services Ltd

Appellants/respondents' Employer

Mr A Hutcheson

Advocate for Respondents/claimants

Claimants (three cleaners)

Respondents/claimants

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of the claimants was unfair under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the employer acted reasonably in treating third party pressure as a sufficient reason for dismissal
  3. 3 Whether the employer was required to discuss or consider changes to alternative employment offers (pay, hours, TUPE)

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal erred in law by failing to apply the correct test for reasonableness under section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, misapprehending the employer's obligations regarding TUPE, and making findings unsupported by evidence. The employer's actions fell within the range of reasonable responses, and the dismissals were fair.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Tribunal's judgment set aside; finding of fair dismissal substituted.

Orders

  • Judgment of the Employment Tribunal set aside.
  • Finding of fair dismissal substituted for unfair dismissal.