Wrongful dismissal

Wrongful dismissal

At common law an employee is wrongfully dismissed if their dismissal was in breach of the contract of employment. Normally this will mean dismissal without the notice due under that contract, but it could also cover a purported summary dismissal for cause by the employer (such as where there is an act or a series of breaches which, taken individually, would not amount to gross misconduct) where in fact the employee had not been guilty of gross misconduct.

Employees who do not qualify for unfair dismissal protection under the statutory (unfair dismissal) regime set out in Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) (ERA 1996, s 94) can bring a claim for wrongful dismissal in the civil courts if their dismissal is in breach of contract.

Employees who do qualify for statutory unfair dismissal protection may bring proceedings in both the employment tribunal and civil courts simultaneously, eg where a highly-paid employee brings both unfair dismissal proceedings in the tribunal, and a claim for damages for wrongful dismissal in the High Court.

For further information about unfair dismissal rights generally, see:

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.