No5’s Russell Bailey succeeds in the EAT in Cetinsoy & others v London United Busways
The appellants were former bus drivers once employed by Centre West who TUPE transferred to London United following a route re-allocation.
London United required them to be based at a different depot and they claimed that the change of work location amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract and a substantial change in working conditions to their material detriment, entitling them to resign and claim to have been automatically unfairly dismissed.
The tribunal was persuaded not to follow the decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in Musse v Abellio and rejected their claims. The EAT upheld the decision of the tribunal on the ground that the determinations were issues of fact that the tribunal had been entitled to reach.
Notwithstanding that the employment contracts in Musse were identical, the change in work location was only three miles compared with seven miles in Musse and, unlike Musse, did not involve a move from the north to the south of the Thames.
News from No5 Chambers
Briefings from No5 Chambers
This recent case in the Court of Protection considered best interests in the context of a minimally conscious patient.
Late last month, the Supreme Court of the UK handed down a judgment on the cases of two severely disabled men who want other people to help them to die.