In Jhuti v Royal Mail Group, the employment tribunal ordered the respondent to pay in excess of £2.3m to Ms Jhuti as compensation following her successful claim for unfair dismissal. In doing so, the tribunal provided guidance as to the valuation of losses of future pension. The parties had been unable to agree the methodology for valuing future pensions losses. Ms Jhuti’s proposed methodology produced a figure in excess of £1m (which would have resulted in an overall award in excess of £3m) whereas the respondent’s proposed methodology produced a figure of around £70,000. The tribunal rejected Ms Jhuti’s proposed methodology, stating that this would result in her being compensated twice for her loss of future earnings, and give rise to gross and unjustifiable overcompensation.
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… >>