Veitch Penny LLP - Exeter | Crediton, Devon

Case

Judge v Crown Leisure Ltd
Employment Appeal Tribunal - (28 September 2004)

Issues

(1) Constructive unfair dismissal
(2) Breach of Contract
(3) Remuneration

Facts

Mr Judge had been employed by Crown in 1980 as a Cash Collector. In May 1998 he was promoted to the position of Special Projects Operation Manager. He terminated his employment with notice as of 27th June 2003.

Mr Judge made a complaint of constructive unfair dismissal.

The background to the case was that in December 2000 Mr Judge was being paid £17,000.00 without bonus. In 2001 a new employee, Mr Mills, joined the company and he was paid substantially more than Mr Judge. He was paid £35,000.00 per year.

Mr Judge was told that it was the company’s intention to, in due course, to increase the salary of all Operation Managers so that they were roughly in line with each other. Mr Judge alleged that he had been told that he would be placed on the same salary as Mr Mills following a discussion he had had with his Manager during the company’s annual dinner dance in December 2001. This conversation was denied by the company.

At first instance, the Tribunal found that on the balance of probabilities there may well have been some casual conversation but these were intended to be words of comfort that the company would eventually fulfil its commitment. The Tribunal found that Mr Judge’s overall remuneration increased by 68% to £34,360.00. It was satisfied that the conduct of the employer did not amount to a breach of the implied duty of trust and confidence.

Mr Judge appealed the decision.

Decision

The appeal was dismissed.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) had to consider whether there was a binding contract between the parties formed at the Christmas party in December 2001. The EAT concluded that the Tribunal’s decision had been correct. It noted that the company had made a commitment to move in due course towards parity and the time had not come when it could be said that there was a fundamental breach of contractual obligation between them.

Comments

The case confirmed that the promise made was not enforceable because there was no intention to create legal relations. However, it is a useful reminder to managers to take care of commitments made to employees in casual conversation.