Posts Tagged ‘Principle’

Employment Law – Unfair Dismissal and Constructive Dismissal – ‘Last Straw’ Principle

March 18th, 2010



An employee who had been employed since 1997 tried unsuccessfully to claim that she had been unfairly and constructively dismissed in the case of Hughes v Gibson and Others (trading as Blanford House Surgery) [2006].

In early June 2004, a number of comments were made in the presence of the employee that led her to indicate to her employer her intention to resign from her position. On 4 June 2004, the employee’s practice manager informed her in writing that her resignation was not accepted. Subsequently, on 28 June, she withdrew her resignation.

She filed a grievance against her employer and on 29 October she received a letter from management regarding her complaints. The letter acknowledged some of her complaints, informed her that some of her complaints could not be made out, and told her that there would be a meeting the following week in which the issues highlighted in her grievance could be further discussed.

Shortly after the receipt of the letter, she informed management of her intent to seek a hearing before an employment tribunal. On 29 November, she resigned from her position, claiming that she had been unfairly and constructively dismissed. The tribunal held that the letter of 29 October had not handled the employee’s grievance appropriately. The tribunal ruled that:-

Hart’s Concept of Law and the Indian Constitution

December 17th, 2009

Hart replaced the images of power and violence in jurisprudential imagination by conceiving law as a system of rules upon rules of social practices informed by their own criterion of validity and normative obligation. Before the advent of modern period legal theory was basically dominated by the natural law ideology which was the touchstone for testing the State law. In the modern period, Hobbes for the first time divorced positive law from natural law and made the State law independent of any external criteria. However, Hobbes did not fulfil the task of positivism fully as he did not distinguish between the actual law (“is law”) and the ideal law (“ought law”). His State-made law was not only an existing law but also an “ought” law. » Read more: Hart’s Concept of Law and the Indian Constitution