Mitigation

Case10: The facts

Mr Mansi and his wife were made redundant. Mr Mansi also had a second job and the tribunal decided to deduct from his unfair dismissal compensation what he was earning in the second job. It did this applying the rule that tribunals should take account of what a dismissed employee gets in a new job, when calculating their loss of earnings compensation.

The ruling

The EAT held that the duty to mitigate does not apply to any work that predates the dismissal and continues after it. It only applies in respect of employment commencing after the dismissal.

* Mansi v Warne and Straw EAT/853/02 (see also Workplace Report, October 2003 for an explanation of the TUPE aspects of this case).

Case 11: The facts

Ian Whiteford was dismissed unfairly. However the tribunal said his failure to find an alternative job with a comparable pension scheme amounted to a failure to mitigate which should lead to less compensation.

The ruling

The EAT rejected the argument that a failure to find a new job with a pension of the same value amounted to a failure to mitigate.

* Wincanton Trans Europe v Whiteford EAT/0022/03