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

be careful of your labels

28 June 2011

The decision in Publicis Consultants v O’Farrell is a stark warning to employers to be careful how they label termination payments in dismissal letters.

O’Farrell claimed breach of contract because Publicis’ dismissed her on four days’ notice instead of her three months’ contractual notice. O’Farrell was therefore entitled to claim damages for breach of contract, equivalent to her 3 months’ notice. However, her dismissal letter stated that she would receive a “ex gratia payment equivalent to three month’s salary”. Publicis claimed that the ex gratia payment was intended to compensate her for her period of notice and therefore should be offset against her notice pay. The EAT held the money was unambiguously advanced as an ex gratia payment and should not therefore be offset against her claim.

Care should be taken when labelling payments as ex gratia and it be made clear that the payment is intended to compensate the employee for their loss of notice to ensure it will be offset against any claim for notice pay.

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