Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital - Parliamentary Intention and Damages Caused by Maladministration of a Contractual Dismissal Procedure
Files in This Item:
|Edwards_v_Chesterfield_Royal_Hospital_case_note.doc||93 kB||Microsoft Word||Download|
|Title:||Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital - Parliamentary Intention and Damages Caused by Maladministration of a Contractual Dismissal Procedure||Authors:||Costello, Kevin||Permanent link:||http://hdl.handle.net/10197/6056||Date:||2-Jan-2013||Abstract:||In Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust  UKSC 58  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||Copyright (published version):||2013 the Author||Keywords:||Wrongful dismissal;Disciplinary procedures;Damages;Rule in Johnson v Unisys (2001);Employment rights of hospital doctors||DOI:||10.1111/1468-2230.12005||Language:||en||Status of Item:||Peer reviewed|
|Appears in Collections:||Law Research Collection|
Show full item record
This item is available under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland. No item may be reproduced for commercial purposes. For other possible restrictions on use please refer to the publisher's URL where this is made available, or to notes contained in the item itself. Other terms may apply.