Issues arising on termination

A contract of employment can end in various ways, including dismissal, resignation and frustration. Unless the contract of employment specifically states otherwise, termination need not be effected in writing, and can, for example be done orally.

If an employer wishes to dismiss an employee lawfully, the dismissal must not be unfair nor breach the employee's contract of employment. Having taken the decision to dismiss, there are further decisions for the employer, eg whether or not to:

•
give notice
•
pay the employee in lieu of notice, and/or
•
put the employee on garden leave

Distinguishing dismissal from other forms of termination

Not all terminations amount to a dismissal. Termination can also occur:

•
by resignation (although sometimes resignations will occur in circumstances that amount to a constructive dismissal)
•
by mutual consent, or
•
by operation of law

Tribunals are reluctant to find that there has been termination by mutual consent. Termination by operation of law is rare; its most common form is frustration of the contract. The expiry of a fixed-term contract without it being renewed is not a dismissal at common

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Employment News

HMCTS announces delay in new ET practice directions implementation

HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has announced a delay in the implementation of new Practice Directions for Employment Tribunals (ET) in England, Wales, and Scotland. In an email circulated to national user group members, HMCTS advised that the Practice Directions, originally scheduled to coincide with the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2025 on 6 January 2025, are now expected later in January 2025. The directions will introduce changes to the presentation of claims, responses, and statutory appeals, including restrictions on email submissions of ET3 response forms.

Lawyers warn skeletal zero-hours contract ban may backfire

Law360: A proposed reform to crack down on exploitative zero-hours contracts is so vaguely drafted that it is unworkable and risks backfiring on its aim to provide more stability for workers, lawyers and industry groups say.

ET Presidents explain how to approach existing Practice Directions and Presidential Guidance in light of new ET procedure rules

Employment analysis: Judge Barry Clarke, the President for the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales), and Judge Susan Walker, the President for the Employment Tribunals (Scotland), have published a joint letter, dated 18 December 2024, concerning the interaction between the current Practice Directions and Presidential Guidance documents and the new Employment Tribunal Rules 2024, which take effect on 6 January 2025.

Employment weekly highlights—19 December 2024

This edition of Employment weekly highlights includes: (1) a round-up of the key employment law developments in 2024 and what to look out for in 2025, (2) a joint letter from the Presidents of the Employment Tribunals for England & Wales and Scotland on how to approach existing Practice Directions and Presidential Guidance in light of the new procedure rules, (3) two Court of Appeal decisions on the extension of employment tribunal time limits, (4) an EAT decision examining the interplay between regulations 4(7), 4(8) and 4(9) of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE 2006), (5) a Court of Appeal ruling that claims that migrant workers were abused in Dyson’s Malaysian factories should be heard in Britain, (6) the IRLR Highlights for January 2025, (7) dates for your diary, and (8) other news items of interest to employment practitioners.