Fotheringhame v Barclays Services Ltd UKEAT/0208/19/BA

Appeal against the ET’s rejection of a claim for interest on the sum payable under a re-engagement order. Appeal dismissed.

The Claimant was unfairly dismissed by the Respondent, and a re-engagement order was made which contained a formula for calculating the sum payable to the Claimant. The Claimant was not re-engaged and, at a subsequent remedy hearing, he was awarded a substantial sum. He claimed interest on the sum which would have been payable under the re-engagement order, but his claim was rejected by the ET. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT held that, although the re-engagement order contained an order to pay the Claimant a sum of money, that sum was conditional on re-engagement having been complied with or, more accurately, "taking place". "Non-compliance" suggests a breach, when in reality an order for re-engagement can legitimately be ignored, on pain of specified consequences. Once the re-engagement did not take place, a further order was made, and the original award fell away. The EAT concluded that interest should not be payable on a conditional award when the condition failed.

http://www.gov.uk/employment-appeal-tribunal-decisions/mr-d-fortheringhame-v-barclays-services-ltd-ukeat-0208-19-ba

Published: 12/05/2020 12:55

Sign up for free email alerts

Email address
First name
Last name
Receive daily
Receive weekly
I agree to this site's terms and conditions

message