Knowledge (XXG)

Crossley v Faithful & Gould Holdings Ltd

Source 📝

83:
retirement on health grounds as he was not expected to recover from his illness. After discussions with his employer he tendered his resignation in terms suggested by the company. The resignation resulted in the loss of entitlement to benefits and the scheme insurer stopped payments after one year. Crossley sought a ruling that an implied term of his contract of employment was that the employer would take reasonable care for his economic well-being and that by not drawing his attention to the loss of benefits had failed in this duty of care.
82:
Crossley was a long-standing employee and director of Faithful & Gould Holdings Ltd. He fell sick and was unable to work. As a member of the firm’s disability insurance scheme he was entitled to benefits while he remained employed by the company. He was advised by his doctor to seek early
91:
The court rejected Crossley's claim. Firstly it held that his resignation had been at his own instigation and secondly that, as a senior employee and director, it was reasonable to expect him to have reviewed the terms of the scheme or taken advice before resigning.
178: 102: 120: 183: 110: 173: 168: 71: 50: 67: 63: 37: 162: 114: 149: 43: 33: 25: 20: 103:Scally v Southern Health and Social Services Board 121:Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd 8: 145:Crossley v Faithful & Gould Holdings Ltd 60:Crossley v Faithful & Gould Holdings Ltd 21:Crossley v Faithful & Gould Holdings Ltd 17: 179:Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases 111:Equitable Life Assurance Society v Hyman 133: 139: 137: 7: 14: 184:2004 in United Kingdom case law 174:United Kingdom labour case law 1: 200: 169:English contract case law 74:in employment contracts. 48: 148:, IRLR ( 152: 16 March 2004). 68:English contract law 70:case, concerning 56: 55: 191: 153: 147: 141: 18: 199: 198: 194: 193: 192: 190: 189: 188: 159: 158: 157: 156: 143: 142: 135: 130: 98: 89: 80: 29:Court of Appeal 12: 11: 5: 197: 195: 187: 186: 181: 176: 171: 161: 160: 155: 154: 132: 131: 129: 126: 125: 124: 117: 107: 97: 94: 88: 85: 79: 76: 54: 53: 46: 45: 41: 40: 35: 31: 30: 27: 23: 22: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 196: 185: 182: 180: 177: 175: 172: 170: 167: 166: 164: 151: 146: 140: 138: 134: 127: 123: 122: 118: 116: 113: 112: 108: 105: 104: 100: 99: 95: 93: 86: 84: 77: 75: 73: 72:implied terms 69: 65: 62: 61: 52: 51:implied terms 47: 42: 39: 36: 32: 28: 24: 19: 16: 144: 119: 109: 101: 90: 81: 64:EWCA Civ 293 59: 58: 57: 38:EWCA Civ 293 15: 49:Insurance, 163:Categories 115:1 AC 408 106:1 AC 294 96:See also 87:Judgment 44:Keywords 34:Citation 66:is an 128:Notes 78:Facts 26:Court 150:EWCA 165:: 136:^

Index

EWCA Civ 293
implied terms
EWCA Civ 293
English contract law
implied terms
Scally v Southern Health and Social Services Board
Equitable Life Assurance Society v Hyman
1 AC 408
Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd


EWCA
Categories
English contract case law
United Kingdom labour case law
Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases
2004 in United Kingdom case law

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.