Summary Dismissal – Calculating the Effective Date of Termination

In the recent case of Cosmeceuticals Ltd v. Parkin it was held that the effective date of termination (EDT) is not moved if notice is subsequently given following an earlier summary dismissal.
In this case, the managing director (the Claimant) of a skin care and makeup distributor was told not to return to work on 1 September following a two-month sabbatical due to long-standing performance concerns. The Claimant was placed on garden leave three days later and then on 29 September her employer, in an attempt to provide “clarity”, gave notice of termination with an ending date of 23 October. The tribunal in the first instance held that the EDT was 23 October. The EAT judged this to be an error, stating that the EDT was in fact the date when the Claimant was first informed of her summary dismissal (1 September).
Employers and employees alike should be mindful that the EDT is a statutory concept which cannot be changed by the agreement of both parties. Significantly in this instance, an EDT of 1 September meant that the Claimant’s case was presented out of time. The case has now been remitted to determine whether the Claimant presented her claim within such time as was reasonably practicable.

Tom Fancett

About Tom Fancett

Tom has experience acting for both employers and employees, advising on the full spectrum of contentious and non-contentious matters. His experience includes advising on large commercial transactions, including redundancy and TUPE issues; undertaking buy side and sell side due diligence exercises into the employment aspects for multiple commercial transactions; coordinating multijurisdictional projects; defending Employment Tribunal claims in relation to unfair dismissal, disability and sex discrimination and whistleblowing; advising on day-to-day HR and disciplinary issues; drafting and negotiating settlement and service agreements; and reviewing company handbooks and template employment contracts.

Full bio