In his latest article, Beach Hut Specialist Richard Ramshaw discusses how much a beach hut is likely to set you back, why some are so expensive and the process involved in buying.
Is there an implied term that an employer will not dismiss an employee for incapability if that would thwart entitlement to long-term disability benefits? Yes, on the facts, held the EAT in Awan v ICTS.
Long-term disability benefit plan
Mr Awan commenced employment with American Airlines as a security agent at Heathrow Airport. His employment contract entitled him to the benefit of an insured long term disability benefit plan. The terms of the plan stated that benefits would terminate in the event the employee was no longer in employment. Mr Awan suffered from depression and went on sick leave. AA then outsourced the security department to ICTS and the employer's obligations under the plan transferred under TUPE.
Dismissal fair
Mr Awan was then dismissed on account of capability. A tribunal found that there was no impediment to the employer dismissing him while he was entitled to receive benefits. It held ICTS acted reasonably and the dismissal was fair. Finally, the dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim so that there was no unlawful disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.
Appeal succeeded
The EAT disagreed. On a proper construction of the contract, a term should be implied that "once the employee has become entitled to payment of disability income due under the long-term disability plan, the employer will not dismiss him on the grounds of his continuing incapacity to work." That term operated to limit the express contractual right to terminate on notice if it would frustrate the contractual entitlement to long term disability benefits.
Paul Burton, Head of Frettens’ Employment Team comments “Dismissal in breach of contract is not necessarily unfair. However here the contractual position was very relevant indeed as part of the circumstances against which the reasonableness of the employer's actions were to be judged”.
The EAT concluded the tribunal's decision that the employee's dismissal was fair, and that it was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, could not stand. These questions were remitted to a fresh tribunal for reconsideration.
At Frettens, all of our solicitors offer a free initial meeting or chat on the phone to answer your questions. If this article raises issues for you or your business, please call us on 01202 499255 Paul will be happy to discuss it with you.
