EAT clarifies injury to feelings claims

first_imgEmployers cannot be held liable for distress or injury to feelings in unfairdismissal cases, the EAT has ruled. This issue was thrown into doubt by the 2001 House of Lords ruling inJohnson v Unisys,when Lord Hoffman suggested tribunals might be able to makeawards for injury to feelings caused by the manner of a dismissal, if thisbreached the implied duty of mutual trust and confidence. Since then, it has been common for former employees alleging unfairdismissal to seek compensation for damage to feelings, and some employmenttribunals have obliged. But in Dunnachie v Kingston upon Hull City Council and other appeals, theEAT has made clear that Johnson did not change the law and claimants areentitled only to compensation for the financial loss suffered. This contrasts with discrimination claims, where employees can receivecompensation for injury to feelings. “This is good news, ensuring that negotiations over dismissals can, inthe absence of discrimination, be kept relatively simple,” said AdamTurner, employment partner at Lovells. Previous Article Next Article EAT clarifies injury to feelings claimsOn 1 Jun 2003 in Personnel Today Comments are closed. Related posts:No related photos.last_img

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *