Callus v Butler Pharmaceuticals [1992] UKEAT 105_91_0605 (6 May 1992)

Callus v Butler Pharmaceuticals [1992] UKEAT 105_91_0605 (6 May 1992)

The Tribunal misdirected itself in law by not accepting the applicant's evidence as true for the purpose of the submission of no case to answer. There was a case to answer based on the applicant's evidence, and the Tribunal should have heard evidence from the respondent before deciding.

Citation
[1992] UKEAT 105_91_0605
Parties
Appellant: Mr Callus; Respondent: Butler Pharmaceuticals
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
06 May 1992
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Constructive Dismissal, Unfair Dismissal, Burden of Proof, Tribunal Procedure
Employment Law Constructive Dismissal Unfair Dismissal Burden of Proof Tribunal Procedure

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Callus

Appellant

Butler Pharmaceuticals

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in upholding a submission of no case to answer on a claim of constructive dismissal
  2. 2 Whether the changes to Mr Callus' employment amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal misdirected itself in law by not accepting the applicant's evidence as true for the purpose of the submission of no case to answer. There was a case to answer based on the applicant's evidence, and the Tribunal should have heard evidence from the respondent before deciding.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • decision of the Tribunal set aside
  • matter remitted to a differently constituted Tribunal for rehearing