Andrews v Kings College NHS Foundation Trust & Anor (Practice and Procedure : Appellate jurisdiction or Reasons or Burns-Barke) [2014] UKEAT 0304_13_1203 (12 March 2014)

Andrews v Kings College NHS Foundation Trust & Anor (Practice and Procedure : Appellate jurisdiction or Reasons or Burns-Barke) [2014] UKEAT 0304_13_1203 (12 March 2014)

The Tribunal's finding that the employer took reasonable steps to notify the Claimant of her pension rights (by attaching leaflets to payslips and posting notices) was a factual determination open to it and not perverse. The Scally implied term requires reasonable steps, not perfection or proof of actual receipt. The Tribunal did not err in law in its approach or conclusions for either period 2 or period 3.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0304_13_1203
Parties
Appellant: Claimant (Appellant); First Respondent: Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust; Second Respondent: Secretary of State for Health
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
12 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms in Employment Contracts, Pension Rights for Part Time Workers, Sex Discrimination, Equal Pay, Reasonableness of Employer Notification, Remedies in Employment Tribunal
Employment Law Pensions Law Contract Law Implied Terms in Employment Contracts Pension Rights for Part Time Workers Sex Discrimination Equal Pay Reasonableness of Employer Notification +1 more

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant (Appellant)

Appellant

Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

First Respondent

Secretary of State for Health

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in the terms of its declaration regarding period 2 (1988-1991) pension rights for the Claimant.
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in finding that the employer took reasonable steps to notify the Claimant of her pension rights for period 3 (1991-2010) under the Scally implied term.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal's finding that the employer took reasonable steps to notify the Claimant of her pension rights (by attaching leaflets to payslips and posting notices) was a factual determination open to it and not perverse. The Scally implied term requires reasonable steps, not perfection or proof of actual receipt. The Tribunal did not err in law in its approach or conclusions for either period 2 or period 3.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal regarding period 2 is dismissed on withdrawal, with clarification that the Claimant is entitled to be a member of the Second Respondent's Pension Scheme for 1 April 1988 to 31 March 1991 and the Second Respondent must provide contribution figures.
  • The appeal regarding period 3 is dismissed; the Tribunal's finding that the employer took reasonable steps is upheld.