An employee of a British company working remotely from Australia could bring a claim in the UK for victimisation for whistleblowing and unfair dismissal.

The Court of Appeal has held that an employer’s use of the word ‘fraud’ as a label for alleged gross misconduct was an immaterial consideration as to whether the subsequent dismissal was fair.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that offensive tweets made by an employee on his personal Twitter account and which did not relate to the employer could be grounds for dismissal for gross misconduct.

The Court of Appeal has held that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s decision to withdraw a Commissioner from office amounted to breach of contract, but that the Commissioner’s subsequent development of clinical depression was not a foreseeable consequence of its decision. As such, it was not liable for losses the Commissioner suffered as a result.

The EAT has remitted a case to the tribunal to consider whether a mentally ill employee could be considered culpable for his actions which led to his summary dismissal for gross misconduct. It emphasised that the conduct must have been wilful and that the mitigating circumstances of the illness must be taken into account.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that the dismissal of a man who took time off for his dependant, in this case his pregnant partner, was not automatically unfair because he failed to inform his employer of the reason for his absence as soon as reasonably practicable.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employee’s previous breach of contract did not prevent him from bringing a claim for constructive dismissal against his former employer. However, the EAT noted that if the employer established that it could have fairly dismissed the employee had it known about his previous breach of contract, the employee’s compensation could be reduced by up to 100%.

An employee who tried to claim constructive dismissal was held by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (‘EAT’) to have affirmed his contract, rendering him unable to claim constructive dismissal, by giving more than his contractual notice.

The EAT ruled that an employee had not been unfairly dismissed after her employer disregarded the independent appeal panel’s decision, which overturned the employer’s original decision to dismiss. Given that the employer was a small nursery, there was no other appropriate person to hear the appeal, there were no clear terms of engagement with the independent panel and a subsequent investigation was completed as part of the appeal, the employer was not bound by the appeal panel’s decision.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal found that employers cannot rely on contractual summary termination clauses to dismiss an employee without notice where in reality there is no gross misconduct or negligence.

The Scottish Courts found that it is potentially reasonable to dismiss a long term absentee employee for ill health even though Occupational Health indicated a potential return within the next couple of months.