Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Cilex Level 6 Employment law > Case law > Flashcards

Case law Flashcards

(87 cards)

Start Studying
1
Q

Offer- terms must be clear case law

A

Gurthing V Lynn 1831

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Offer not an invitation to treat

A

Pharmaceutical soc of GB V Boots 1953

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Offer can be revoked before acceptance case law

A

Routledge V Grant 1828

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Counter offer is not acceptance case law

A

Hyde V Wrench 1840

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Acceptance must be unconditional case law

A

Butler Machine tool V Excell Corp 1979

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Accepted by Conduct case law

A

Brogden V Met Railways 1877

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Accepted by performance

A

Carlill V Carbolic smoke 1893

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Silence is not acceptance

A

Felthouse V Brindley 1863

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Acceptance must be communicated

A

Powell V Lee 1908

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Acceptance by post Rules

A

Adams V Lindsell 1818

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Consideration must be sufficient but need not be adequate

A

Chappell V Nestle 1959

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Minors unable to enter a contract

A

Proform Sports V Proactive sports 2006 (wayne rooney)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Intention to create legal relations

A

Rose & Frank V Crompton Bros 1925

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Duty of care work related stress case law

A

Walker V Northumberland CC 1995

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Custom & Practice case law

A

Hutton V Warren 1836

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Corporate Manslaughter H&S guides not followed

A

Rv Cotswold Geotech 2011

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Company can make rules for a legitimate reason case law

A

Dryden V Greater Glasgow Health Board 1992

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Terms incorporated from a handbook case law

A

Keeley V Fosroc 2006

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Codes of practice not forming terms case law

A

Wandsworth London BC V D’silva 1998

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Is term aspirational or necessary for efficacy case law

A

Alexander V Std telephone and cables 1991

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Extra working hours in contra to implied duty of care

A

Johnstone V Bloomsbuty heath 1991

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

geographical Mobility not reasonable case law

A

O’brien V Associated Fire alarms 1968

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Geographical Mobility reasonable case law

A

Managers(holburn) Ltd V Hohne 1977

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Employee must be able to comply to term

A

United Bank V Akhtar 1989

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Restrictive covenants must protect a legitimate interest and be reasonable to terms of time & distance unreasonable case law
Nordenfelt V Maxim Nordenfelf Guns 1894
26
Restrictive covenants must protect a legitimate interest and be reasonable to terms of time/distance unreasonable case law short distance
Mason V Provident clothing 1913
27
Restrictive covenants must protect a legitimate interest and be reasonable to terms of time/distance reasonable case law
Fitch V Dewes 1920
28
Restrictive covenants must protect a legitimate interest and be reasonable to terms of time/distance reasonable Poaching customers
Home counties Darries V Skilton 1970
29
Restrictive covenants must protect a legitimate interest and be reasonable to terms of time/distance unreasonable Poaching Staff
Kores Manufacturing v Kolok Manufacturing 1919
30
Restrictive covenants must protect a legitimate interest and be reasonable to terms of time/distance unreasonable Non Compete/ Skill restraint
Wyatt V Keglinger and Femau 1933
31
Restrictive covenants must protect a legitimate interest and be reasonable to terms of time/distance reasonable Non Compete/ Skill restraint
Panayioutou ( George Michael) V Sony 1994
32
Implied term Mutual Trust and confidence broken by employer - actions
Malik & Mahmud V Bank Of credit and commerce international 1977
33
Implied term Mutual Trust and confidence broken by employer - deduction of wages acceptable on custom and practice
Sagar V Ridehalgh 1931
34
Implied terms - custom and practice - redundancy terms differ from contract
Albion Automotive V Walker & Orrs 2002
35
Section 1 statement not a contact - prima facie evidence
System Floors V Daniel 1985
36
Officious bystander test
Reigate V Union manufacturing 1918
37
Business efficacy must of been intended
The moorcock 1889
38
Accepted change of terms by conduct
GAp Personnel V Robinson 2007
39
Employment status Control test Old
Yewens V Noakes 1880
40
Employment status Control test evolved
Walker V Crystal Palace 1910
41
Employment status Integration Full intergration
Cassidy V Ministry of Heath 1951
42
Control Test Contract of V Contract For
Stevenson, Jordan Harrison Ltd v MacDonald & Evans 1952
43
Level of integration Multiple test
Market Investigations v Minister for Social security 1969
44
Contract for service - Limited power of delegation not inconsistent case law
Express and Echo Publications Limited v Tanton 1999
45
Contract for service - Limited power of delegation inconsistent
Mac farlane V Glasgow CC 2001
46
Mutuality of obligation no obligation
Carmichael & Leese V National Power 1999
47
Mutuality of obligation no obligation - free choice
Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions 1968
48
Agreement to end employment must be unconditioanl
Harman V Flexible lamps 1980
49
Termination by frustration - Illness
Egg stores V Leibovici 1977
50
Termination by frustration - Imprisonment Fair
Hare V Murphy Bros 1974
51
Termination by frustration - Imprisonment Unfair
Four Seasons Heath Care V Maughan 2005
52
Resignation unambiguous words not to be relied upon
Sothern V Franks Charlesly 1981
53
Time frame for consideration of resignation
Ali V Birmingham City council 2008
54
Fair dismissal - wrongful - notice period not given
Shove V Downs Surgical 1984
55
Must be dismissed resignation is not dismissal
Morton V Sundour Fabrics Ltd 1967
56
Must be dismissed -words spoken in anger by employer
Tanner V D T Kean 1978
57
Notice must be full days - verbal starts day after
West V Kneels 1986
58
Constructive dismissal employer action unreasonable (reversed on appeal but principles correct)
Western Excavating V Sharp 1978
59
Summary dismissed - dishonest behavior dismissal Fair
Sinclair V Neighbor 1967
60
Summary dismissed - Trust breached dismissal Fair
Ross V Aquascutum 1973
61
Summary dismissed failure to follow reasonable instruction dismissal Fair
Pepper V Webb 1969
62
Summary dismissed failure to follow reasonable instruction dismissal unfair (goaded)
Wilson V Racher 1974
63
Insufficient Nexus -Frustration due to crime - unrelated - dismissal not justified
Bradshaw V Rugby Portland Cement 1972
64
Capability Belief of employer - Fair
Taylor V Alidair 1978
65
Conduct Gross misconduct - unfair prev good service not taken into consideration
British Leyland V Swift 1981
66
Conduct Gross Misconduct - fair
Iceland Frozen foods V Jones 1983
67
Conduct Dismissed for first offence -unfair not gross misconduct
Lock V Cardiff Railway co 1998
68
Conduct Drinking during working hours - unfair not a specific term
Dairy Produce packers V Berverstock 1981
69
Conduct Reasonable approach - fair
BSH V Burchell 1980
70
Conduct non Reasonable approach - unfair
W Weddell v Tepper 1980
71
Conduct outside of work - Fair
Moore v C&A 1981
72
Conduct outside of work - unFair
Securicour Gaurding limited V R 1994
73
Conduct failing to do job correctly - unfair lack of supervision
Davison V Kent Meters 1975
74
Sosr refusal to accept T&C Change - Fair
hollister v NFU 1979
75
SoSr/Conduct unable to distinguish between 2 - fair
Monie V Coral Racing 1980
76
SoSR Personality clashes - Fair
perkin v st georges heathcare trust 2005
77
SoSR Personality clashes - Fair
Treganowan v Robert Knee Ltd 1975
78
Sosr - expiry of fixed term contract - fair
terry v east sussex cc 1976
79
sosr pressure from third party or customer - fair
Dobie v Burns international security 1984
80
sosr pressure from third party or customer - fair
Henderson V connect 2010
81
Redundancy - reason not redundancy so unfair
Vaux and Assoc Breweries V Ward 1969
82
Redundancy not all duties redundant but selection fair
Murray * Another V Foyle Meats 1999
83
Redundancy - mobility -where actually worked not could work - fair
High Table V Horst and others 1997
84
Redundancy Pool to narrow Unfair
Hendy Banks Priniting V Fairbrother and others 2004
85
Redundancy criteria unfair but agreed with Union so fair
L C Syratt V Gate Gourmet 2009
86
Redundancy - age unfair
Lantsbury V Ebara 2009
87
Redundancy Criteria objective fair
Williams V Contryside prop 2010

Cilex Level 6 Employment law (7 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions