The Partners of Haxby Practice v Collen [2012] UKEAT /0120/12/DM
Published on: 07/12/2012
Issues Covered:
Article Authors
The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Background
The claimant underwent the selection process for a position and was offered a contract with employment by the respondent over the telephone. The claimant was told at this point that the salary was £22,427. This verbal offer was followed with a written offer, which set out detail of the start date and salary yet this information was incorrect. The salary on the letter was the greater sum of £30,762. The claimant enquired into the detail of the start date but did not mention the salary. Upon starting her job with the firm the claimant was informed that the salary on the letter had been an error and the salary actual was £22,427, the original sum offered. Both parties attempted to negotiate terms in an effort to reach a compromise but such efforts failed an ultimately the claimants contract of employment was terminated. The claimant then decided to bring proceedings for wrongful dismissal. She was successful in this claim and the court awarded damages. The amount of damages awarded was based on the annual salary figure of £30,762 and a sum for the days she worked based on the £22,427 figure.The respondent appealed the manner in which the Employment Tribunal reached this decision and questioned the procedure which took place during the hearing. The EAT dismissed the appeal. The tribunal‟s reasoned that both the claimant and respondent had agreed that they would not be bound until there had been a written offer and acceptance. Further even if the telephone conversation could be deemed binding, this was overturned by the subsequent written agreements in the form of the letters. The tribunal concluded that it could not be said the claimant accepted the offer made in the letter knowing or believing it to be incorrect. The tribunal acknowledged that there had certainly been a substantial difference in what was understood between the parties in the oral agreement and the written agreement but that this in itself did not result in an error of law. The tribunal concluded that the Judge did not act in such a manner as to make the proceedings unfair. http://www.employmentappeals.gov.uk/Public/Upload/12_0120rjphaoJODM.doc
Continue reading
We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.
Already a subscriber?
Please log in to view the full article.
What you'll get:
- Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
- Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
- 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
- Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team
Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial
Disclaimer
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.
This article is correct at 07/12/2012
Recent Case Law
Duployen v Whyte & Mackay Ltd [2025]
14/01/2025
McCahon v Chief Constable of the PSNI [2024]
16/12/2024
Q&A
How to handle it
Legal Island’s LMS, licensed to you
Imagine your staff having 24/7 access to a centralised training platform, tailored to your organisation’s brand and staff training needs, with unlimited users.
Learn more →
