Harrison v Post Office [1992] UKEAT 460_90_2209 (22 September 1992)

Harrison v Post Office [1992] UKEAT 460_90_2209 (22 September 1992)

The employer followed the agreed procedures for dealing with irregular attendance, provided opportunities for the appellant to seek support, and made a decision that was within the range of reasonable responses. The Tribunal could not find the employer's actions unreasonable or in breach of employment law, and thus...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1992] UKEAT 460_90_2209
Parties
Appellant: Mr Harrison; Respondent: Post Office
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
22 September 1992
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Capability Dismissal, Procedural Fairness, Medical Evidence in Employment, Reasonableness of Employer's Decision
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Capability Dismissal Procedural Fairness Medical Evidence in Employment Reasonableness of Employer's Decision

Source-derived case record

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 Harrison

Appellant

Post Office

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of Mr Harrison for unsatisfactory attendance constituted unfair dismissal under employment law
  2. 2 Whether the employer followed proper procedures and acted reasonably in dismissing the appellant for capability (ill health)

Ratio Decidendi

The employer followed the agreed procedures for dealing with irregular attendance, provided opportunities for the appellant to seek support, and made a decision that was within the range of reasonable responses. The Tribunal could not find the employer's actions unreasonable or in breach of employment law, and thus the dismissal was not unfair.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed