Dixon v British Broadcasting Corpn

For the purposes of the unfair-dismissal provisions, employment is for a fixed term where the contract specifies a definite period, even if it may be terminated earlier by notice. The statutory concept cannot be construed so that an employer may avoid employee protection merely by inserting a notice clause into a contract for a stated term.

The Court of Appeal departed from the contrary reasoning in British Broadcasting Corporation v Ioannou, treating that reasoning as erroneous and reached per incuriam. Where a fixed term expires without renewal, the employee is treated as dismissed and the industrial tribunal has jurisdiction to determine whether the dismissal was unfair.

Two house services attendants employed by the British Broadcasting Corporation under successive short-term written contracts claimed unfair dismissal and redundancy payments after their contracts expired without further renewal. Each contract specified a definite period but also allowed termination by one week’s written notice.

The industrial tribunal accepted the BBC’s preliminary objection that the employees had not been dismissed. The Employment Appeal Tribunal’s decision was appealed to the Court of Appeal. The central issue was whether a contract for a specified period remained a contract for a fixed term under paragraph 5(2)(b) of Part II of Schedule 1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1974, despite the notice provision.

1. Appeal dismissed with costs. The employees were entitled to present their claims before an industrial tribunal, and the cases were remitted for reconsideration.
2. Part II of Schedule 1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1974 formed a statutory code which had to be read as a whole. The expression fixed term in paragraph 5(2)(b) meant a specified stated period.
3. A contract did not cease to be for a fixed term merely because it contained a clause permitting termination by notice before the specified period expired. Otherwise, an employer could defeat the protection against unfair dismissal by inserting a simple notice clause into every fixed-period contract.
4. Under paragraph 5(2)(b), expiry of the specified term without renewal constituted dismissal. The employees could therefore pursue their claims, after which the employer would bear the burden of showing that any dismissal was not unfair and was supported by good reasons.
5. The Court reconsidered British Broadcasting Corporation v Ioannou (1975) 1 Queen's Bench 781. The Master of the Rolls described its second ground as mistaken. Lord Justice Shaw considered the reasoning per incuriam and unnecessary to the result. Lord Justice Brandon likewise regarded the decision as erroneous because the statutory code had not been viewed as a whole. The Court declined to follow that reasoning.

• Court of Appeal: dismissed the BBC’s appeals with costs and held that the employees were entitled to have their claims considered by an industrial tribunal.
• Industrial tribunal: held that the employees had not been dismissed and that it lacked jurisdiction.
• Employment Appeal Tribunal: decision appealed to the Court of Appeal; the Court of Appeal remitted the claims for reconsideration.