Williams v Compair Maxam Ltd ICR 156 EAT. BAILII case number: UKEAT 372_81_2201. Retrieved 03 September 2014. is a UK labour law case, concerning unfair dismissal, now governed by the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Facts Compair Maxam Ltd was losing business. Departmental managers picked teams of core staff who could be retained to keep the business viable. They chose on personal preference for what they thought would be good for the company, but the union was not consulted. Other employees were dismissed for redundancy and given money beyond statutory minima. Five workers claimed dismissal was unfair.
The Tribunal dismissed the claims, saying that the managers’ preferences were a reasonable way of doing the job. This was appealed on grounds of perversity.
Judgment Browne-Wilkinson J said that there was an error of law by reaching a conclusion so perverse on the facts. The dismissal selection was unfair, ‘the correct approach is to consider whether an industrial tribunal, properly directed in law and properly appreciating what is currently regarded as fair industrial practice, could have reached the decision reached by the majority of this tribunal. We have reached the conclusion that it could not.’ His judgment was as follows.
Influence The judgment of the case and its summary have often been cited by many legal organisations and unions to explain workers' rights when they are made redundant,Employment Law - Collective Redundancies. CWU, The Communications Union. Retrieved 03 September 2014.Dr John McMullen (21 May 2009). Fair Grounds?. New Law Journal. Retrieved 03 September 2014.Simon deMaid, Solicitor (Winter 2008). What is a Fair Redundancy?. Legal Update. Howes Percival, Solicitors. Retrieved 03 September 2014. and in some cases when this judgment may not apply.Thompsons Solicitors (24 March 2011). "Kicked into touch": Morgan v The Welsh Rugby Union. Retrieved 03 September 2014.
See also
UK labour law
References