Options
Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital - Parliamentary Intention and Damages Caused by Maladministration of a Contractual Dismissal Procedure
Author(s)
Date Issued
2013-01-02
Date Available
2015-01-02T04:00:09Z
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
File(s)
No Thumbnail Available
Name
Edwards_v_Chesterfield_Royal_Hospital_case_note.doc
Size
93 KB
Format
Microsoft Word
Checksum (MD5)
5574fbdafe5f7b0c0f83da438c3981f1
Owning collection