Our website is set to allow the use of cookies. For more information and to change settings click here. If you are happy with cookies please click "Continue" or simply continue browsing. Continue.

Employment Law

Legal guidance - compliance - software

09 JAN 2013

Anderson and Others v London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority UKEAT/0505/11/SM; (2012) EMPLR 168

Contract of employment - interpretation of terms

19 July 2012

Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT)

Slade DBE J, Mr C Edwards and Mr P Gammon MBE

The subjective intentions of parties to a contract and the negotiations leading up to an agreement are irrelevant in interpreting the agreement if its wording is clear.

The Claimants' contracts of employment provided that, on 1 April 2009, they would receive a pay increase of either 2.5% or the increase negotiated by the National Joint Council plus 1%. The employers awarded an increase of the NJC agreed increase plus 1%, which was less than 2.5%. The Claimants argued that the intentions of the parties, as demonstrated in the negotiations before the agreement, were that the employers would pay the higher of 2.5% and the NJC rate plus 1%. The EAT held that subjective intentions of the parties and the negotiations before the agreement were irrelevant. The meaning of the agreement was clear. The employer was given two options and was entitled to choose whichever of those options it wanted.

Social Media in the Workplace

Social Media in the Workplace

A Handbook

This book is intended as a handbook for advisers to employers, providing an overview of the...



Law and Practice

The status of employment rights on the transfer of an undertaking is an extremely complex area of...