Hurst v Barley Parkinson Tea Ltd & Anor [1995] UKEAT 842_95_2911 (29 November 1995)

The employment was frustrated by operation of law due to the appellant's long-term illness and inability to return to work, and thus there was no dismissal entitling him to redundancy payment.

Citation: [1995] UKEAT 842_95_2911
Parties: Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: First Respondents
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 29 November 1995
Procedural Posture: Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Redundancy, Frustration of Contract, Dismissal

Employment Law Redundancy Frustration of Contract Dismissal

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Appellant

First Respondents

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether the appellant was dismissed or whether the contract was frustrated by operation of law
2 Entitlement to redundancy payment

Ratio Decidendi

The employment was frustrated by operation of law due to the appellant's long-term illness and inability to return to work, and thus there was no dismissal entitling him to redundancy payment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed