Landmark Employment cases
Foundational UK employment authorities — unfair dismissal, discrimination, Equality Act — ordered by citation impact.
34 landmarks, ordered by citation impact.
- 01
Ready Mixed Concrete v Minister of Pensions
[1968] 2 QB 497 · Queen's Bench Division · 1968Court establishes three-part test for employee versus contractor status
- 02
Market Investigations v Minister of Social Security
[1969] 2 QB 173 · Queen's Bench Division · 1969Multiple factor test determines employee versus independent contractor status comprehensively.
- 03
Western Excavating v Sharp
[1978] QB 761 · Court of Appeal · 1978Court of Appeal establishes contractual test for constructive dismissal claims
- 04
British Home Stores v Burchell
[1980] ICR 303 · Employment Appeal Tribunal · 1980Employment Appeal Tribunal establishes three-stage test for fair dismissal
- 05
Williams v Compair Maxam
[1982] ICR 156 · Employment Appeal Tribunal · 1982Employment tribunal sets landmark principles for fair redundancy procedures
- 06
Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones
[1983] ICR 17 · Employment Appeal Tribunal · 1983Employment Appeal Tribunal establishes 'band of reasonable responses' test for unfair dismissal
- 07
Mandla v Dowell Lee
[1983] 2 AC 548 · House of Lords · 1983Sikhs constitute racial group protected from indirect discrimination in schools
- 08
Nethermere v Gardiner
[1984] ICR 612 · Court of Appeal · 1984Homeworkers can be employees despite irregular hours and flexible arrangements
- 09
TUPE — Spijkers v Gebroeders Benedik Abattoir CV
[1986] 2 CMLR 296 · European Court of Justice · 1986ECJ established multi-factor test for identifying business transfers under EU law.
- 10
Faccenda Chicken v Fowler
[1987] Ch 117 · Court of Appeal · 1987Court defines post-employment confidentiality duties for trade secrets and business information
- 11
Polkey v AE Dayton Services
[1988] AC 344 · House of Lords · 1988House of Lords rules unfair dismissal requires proper procedure regardless of outcome
- 12
Discrimination — James v Eastleigh Borough Council
[1990] 2 AC 751 · House of Lords · 1990Direct discrimination established without need to prove discriminatory intention or motive.
- 13
Equal Pay — Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority
[1993] ECR I-5535 · European Court of Justice · 1993Significant pay gaps between gendered occupations can shift burden to employers.
- 14
Trade Unions — Associated Newspapers Ltd v Wilson
[1995] 2 AC 454 · House of Lords · 1995Employers may offer inducements to abandon collective bargaining under domestic law.
- 15
Malik v BKCI
[1998] AC 20 · House of Lords · 1998House of Lords establishes employer duty of mutual trust and confidence
- 16
Hashman and Harrup v United Kingdom
(1999) 30 EHRR 241 · European Court of Human Rights · 1999Vague binding over orders violate Article 10 freedom of expression requirements.
- 17
Carmichael v National Power
[1999] 1 WLR 2042 · House of Lords · 1999House of Lords clarifies employment status test for casual workers
- 18
Nagarajan v London Regional Transport
[2000] 1 AC 501 · House of Lords · 2000Racial discrimination can be unconscious; tribunals should examine whether race influenced treatment.
- 19
Working Time — R v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, ex parte BECTU
[2001] ECR I-4881 · European Court of Justice · 2001Right to paid annual leave accrues immediately without qualifying employment periods.
- 20
Johnson v Unisys
[2001] UKHL 13 · House of Lords · 2001No tort claims for unfair dismissal - statutory regime provides exclusive remedy
- 21
Whistleblowing — Parkins v Sodexho Ltd
[2002] IRLR 109 · Employment Appeal Tribunal · 2002Whistleblowing protection requires good faith but permits mixed motives including personal grievance.
- 22
Shamoon v Chief Constable
[2003] UKHL 11 · House of Lords · 2003House of Lords clarifies direct discrimination test in employment cases
- 23
Eastwood v Magnox Electric
[2004] UKHL 35 · House of Lords · 2004Wrongful dismissal claims causing psychiatric injury cannot be pursued in tort courts.
- 24
James v London Borough of Greenwich
[2008] EWCA Civ 35 · Court of Appeal · 2008Agency workers cannot claim equal pay with permanent staff at user organization.
- 25
Coleman v Attridge Law
[2008] IRLR 722 · European Court of Justice · 2008Discrimination law protects employees facing discrimination by association with disabled persons.
- 26
Gisda Cyf v Barratt
[2010] UKSC 41 · Supreme Court · 2010Dismissal letter time limits run from reading, not delivery
- 27
Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital
[2011] UKSC 58 · Supreme Court · 2011Dismissal-related claims cannot circumvent employment tribunals through tort law.
- 28
Autoclenz v Belcher
[2011] UKSC 41 · Supreme Court · 2011Courts must examine reality of work relationship over written contract terms
- 29
Homer v Chief Constable
[2012] UKSC 15 · Supreme Court · 2012Supreme Court clarifies justification test for indirect age discrimination claims
- 30
Seldon v Clarkson Wright
[2012] UKSC 16 · Supreme Court · 2012Supreme Court allows mandatory retirement if properly justified and proportionate
- 31
Essop v Home Office
[2017] UKSC 27 · Supreme Court · 2017 - 32
Pimlico Plumbers v Smith
[2018] UKSC 29 · Supreme Court · 2018Supreme Court finds plumber was worker despite self-employment contract
- 33
Uber BV v Aslam
[2021] UKSC 5 · Supreme Court · 2021Supreme Court rules Uber drivers are workers, not self-employed contractors
- 34
D.E.L.T.A. Merseyside Limited and another v Uber Britannia Limited
[2025] UKSC 31 · United Kingdom Supreme Court · 2025Whether private hire vehicle operator must contract as principal with passenger or may use agency/intermediary model