0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

say what you mean

24 September 2010

What’s the difference between the allegations ‘loss of £3,000′ and ‘theft of £3,000’? A finding of unfair dismissal says the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in Celebi v Compass.

Mrs Celebi’s employers invited her to a disciplinary hearing regarding the allegation ‘loss of £3,000’. The evidence put to the tribunal was that they actually believed she had stolen the money. The fact that Mrs Celebi appeared to accept at the time that she knew she was being accused of theft could not be relied upon by her employers and it was at that point that the allegations should have been clarified. The EAT held that ‘it is a logical conclusion of a failure to put the allegation of theft to the claimant that the dismissal is unfair.’
The lesson to be learnt from this case is to say what you mean and not to try and save an employee’s feelings by attempting to soften an allegation.

related opinions

Home Office Central Registry for modern slavery statement goes live - first universities publish statements

The Home Office recently launched a central registry for modern slavery statements. A growing number of educational organisations, including a number of universities, have published statements on the registry.

View blog

Equal pay at ASDA stores - appeal to the Supreme Court unsuccessful

35,000 workers working in ASDA’s retail business sought to compare themselves to workers at distribution depots for equal pay purposes. Find out more about this Employment Appeal Tribunal.

View blog

Supreme Court confirms that sleep ins are not working time

The Supreme Court judgment represents the conclusion on whether or not “sleep in time” should be classified as working time, when calculating the National Minimum Wage (NMW).

View blog

Mencap case: No entitlement to National Minimum Wage for sleep-in shifts

In a pivotal and much anticipated judgment for the social care sector, the Supreme Court has ruled that workers are not entitled to the National Minimum Wage for all time spent on a sleep-in shift.

View blog

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up