Benjy has lodged a claim against Citeh in the Employment Tribunal (despite the arbitration clause in his contract) for his unpaid wages for the time he was on remand (before being acquitted at trial).
This is a claim under s.13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. This says that to defend a claim, an employer must obtain written consent for that kind of deduction in advance, either in the contract of employment itself or a written policy supplied to the employee, to make the deduction, and that therefore the amount deducted is not "properly payable" (s.13(3)) under the contract, and so lawful.
Unless anyone has a copy of his contract, as well as the relevant Manchester City policies as well as the factual background and timeline (which I don't) they can't give you a proper answer.
I would note, however, that his acquittal of the crimes on the criminal burden of proof are entirely irrelevant to the claim. The relevant issue is whether Manchester CIty were entitled suspend him before his acquittal, and whether they were entitled to pay him what they did (if anything) in any relevant period.
Probably a stupid question but is it obligatory to bring claims relating to breaches of an employment contract (rather than the implied unfair dismissal/discrimination claims) in the employment tribunal or can you bring a claim for that in the "normal" high/county court.
Sorry if this is a stupid question, the last time I looked at employment law was when I was a trainee back in 2006.
It isn't obligatory to bring any claims in the Employment Tribunal, you could in theory bring such claims in the County or High Court if you wanted to, but you'd be mad to because you'd be exposed to the usual fee and costs regime, which doesn't apply in the ET. It's free to bring a claim in the ET, and costs aren't awarded against a party unless they've behaved vexatiously or unreasonably.
You actually can't bring a breach of contract claim on its own in the ET, it has to be combined with another claim. You can bring a statutory claim for unlawful deductions in the ET, which itself relies on a breach of contract, and this system was designed so that claimants with little or no resources could bring a claim of relatively low value quickly and cheaply against rogue employers.
1
0
it'll settle, so yes
0
0
This is an unlawful deductions claim in the ET.
This is a claim under s.13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. This says that to defend a claim, an employer must obtain written consent for that kind of deduction in advance, either in the contract of employment itself or a written policy supplied to the employee, to make the deduction, and that therefore the amount deducted is not "properly payable" (s.13(3)) under the contract, and so lawful.
Unless anyone has a copy of his contract, as well as the relevant Manchester City policies as well as the factual background and timeline (which I don't) they can't give you a proper answer.
I would note, however, that his acquittal of the crimes on the criminal burden of proof are entirely irrelevant to the claim. The relevant issue is whether Manchester CIty were entitled suspend him before his acquittal, and whether they were entitled to pay him what they did (if anything) in any relevant period.
0
0
You’re welcome
0
1
well now i have the rock as maui going round my head
0
0
That is interesting Face.
Probably a stupid question but is it obligatory to bring claims relating to breaches of an employment contract (rather than the implied unfair dismissal/discrimination claims) in the employment tribunal or can you bring a claim for that in the "normal" high/county court.
Sorry if this is a stupid question, the last time I looked at employment law was when I was a trainee back in 2006.
0
0
It isn't obligatory to bring any claims in the Employment Tribunal, you could in theory bring such claims in the County or High Court if you wanted to, but you'd be mad to because you'd be exposed to the usual fee and costs regime, which doesn't apply in the ET. It's free to bring a claim in the ET, and costs aren't awarded against a party unless they've behaved vexatiously or unreasonably.
You actually can't bring a breach of contract claim on its own in the ET, it has to be combined with another claim. You can bring a statutory claim for unlawful deductions in the ET, which itself relies on a breach of contract, and this system was designed so that claimants with little or no resources could bring a claim of relatively low value quickly and cheaply against rogue employers.
0
0
That makes sense, thanks for explaining.
Join the discussion