Options
Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital - Parliamentary Intention and Damages Caused by Maladministration of a Contractual Dismissal Procedure
File(s)
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Edwards_v_Chesterfield_Royal_Hospital_case_note.doc | 93 KB |
Author(s)
Date Issued
02 January 2013
Date Available
02T04:00:09Z January 2015
Abstract
In Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2011] UKSC 58 [2012] 2 W.L.R. 55 the Supreme Court addressed the following question: is an employee, who can establish that (a) if a contractual disciplinary process had been correctly administered he would have been exonerated, and (b) thereafter employed until retirement, able to sue for loss of the earnings that he would have acquired until retirement? Three members of the Supreme Court held that such a remedy was not reconcilable with the enactment, originally in the Industrial Relations Act 1971, of a statutory unfair dismissals protection regime. It was Parliament's intention that an employee should not be able to outmanoeuvre the statute's compensation limitation rules by deploying a superior common law remedy. This note considers that reading of Parliament's intention.
Type of Material
Journal Article
Publisher
Wiley
Journal
Modern Law Review
Volume
76
Issue
1
Start Page
134
End Page
145
Copyright (Published Version)
2013 the Author
Language
English
Status of Item
Peer reviewed
This item is made available under a Creative Commons License
Owning collection
Scopus© citations
3
Acquisition Date
Jun 2, 2023
Jun 2, 2023
Views
1726
Last Month
8
8
Acquisition Date
Jun 2, 2023
Jun 2, 2023
Downloads
471
Last Month
12
12
Acquisition Date
Jun 2, 2023
Jun 2, 2023