BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Sandwell Healthcare NHS Trust v Lowe [1997] UKEAT 1054_97_2011 (20 November 1997)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1997/1054_97_2011.html
Cite as: [1997] UKEAT 1054_97_2011

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]


BAILII case number: [1997] UKEAT 1054_97_2011
Appeal No. EAT/1054/97

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 20 November 1997

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE PETER CLARK

MR R SANDERSON OBE

MRS R A VICKERS



SANDWELL HEALTHCARE NHS TRUST APPELLANT

MRS C LOWE RESPONDENT


Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING - EX PARTE

© Copyright 1997


    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellants MR J SMITH
    (Solicitor)
    Messrs Higgs & Sons
    Solicitors
    Inhedge House
    31 Wolverhampton Street
    Dudley
    West Midlands
    DY1 1EY
       


     

    JUDGE PETER CLARK: The issue in this case before the Birmingham Industrial Tribunal was, first, what was the reason for dismissal? The employee contended that it was redundancy, the employer relied on some other substantial reason, namely a business reorganisation.

    The applicant was employed as a staff nurse under a contract of employment which provided that she was to work part-time two nights per week, ten hours per shift.

    As a result of a reorganisation, the respondent employer introduced flexible shift working. The new system meant that it was essential that staff nurses worked days as well as nights. Daytime work did not fit with the applicant's domestic and other part-time work commitments.

    The Industrial Tribunal found that the reason for dismissal was redundancy on the basis that the requirements of the business for employees to carry out the work of night nurse had ceased.

    We think that the respondent's appeal against that finding raises an arguable point of law. The Industrial Tribunal relied upon the so-called contract test; see now Safeway v Burrell [1997] IRLR 200 and High Table v Horst [1997] IRLR 513. Further, the question is whether there was a diminution in the requirement of the number of employees to do work of a particular kind; rescheduling shifts may not result in a dismissal by reason of redundancy. Johnson v Nottinghamshire Combined Police Authority [1974] ICR 170.

    In these circumstances we shall allow this appeal to proceed to a full hearing. It will be listed for half a day, and the parties should exchange skeleton arguments and lodge copies with the Employment Appeal Tribunal not less than 14 days before the date fixed for hearing.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1997/1054_97_2011.html