In Rajput v Sky Retail Stores Ltd [2024] EAT 46 the employment tribunal held that unilateral changes to the claimants’ contracts (changing their role from Store Manager to Sales Advisor but increasing their pay) had resulted in Hogg v Dover College [1990] ICR 39 dismissals. This meant that the claimants could not pursue a wages claim in respect of their old contracts. On appeal, the claimants sought to argue that in respect of a contract-based claim, Hogg must be interpreted or applied in light of Geys v Sociéte Générale, London Branch [2013] IRLR 122 in which it was held that the elective theory of termination applies to contracts of employment.
The EAT recognised that this was a novel doctrinal point that was at least arguable but, since it was a new substantive point which had not been run below, permission to run the point was refused.
While the EAT in Rajput did not determine the impact of Geys on Hogg dismissals, this legal argument may be something that parties choose to explore in future cases.
Formed in 2017, following significant legislative changes designed to increase competition within the legal services marketplace, Pro Employment Law is a progressive set of barristers’ chambers, consisting only of experienced employment law barristers, offering a full range of specialist advisory, case management, and advocacy services directly to the public through the Public Access scheme. We supply our legal services exclusively in the area of Employment Law to clients located across England & Wales. All of the legal services we supply are covered by professional indemnity insurance with Bar Mutual.
Please contact us for a free, initial telephone consultation with a barrister.
In McMahon v AXA ICAS [2025] EAT 8, the EAT faced a number of issues on appeal around the payment due from a deduction of wages as well as a disability discrimination claim which was struck out by the employment tribunal. The respondent also cross-appealed a decision on deduction of wages, arguing that there was… >>
Where a claimant has failed to comply with the early conciliation (EC) requirement but the employment tribunal did not reject the claim under either Rule 10 or 12 of the ET Rules 2013 (now Rules 12 or 13 of the ET Rules 2024), the tribunal should not reject the claim at a later stage, eg… >>
In East Lancashire NHS Trust v Akram [2025] EAT 2, the EAT followed the approach set out by the Supreme Court in Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland v Agnew [2024] IRLR 56 on how to calculate a day’s pay for holiday pay purposes. It explained that: • a person should receive… >>