Fitzpatrick v BRB [1992] ICR 221 (CA)

• Plaintiff got a job with BRB, but had omitted from her application form that she had been sacked after just 9 days from another company (F).

• BRB (following a newspaper report) discovered this along with the fact that she was an active unionist and had been involved in union activities while working for previous employers.

• BRB sacked her for failing to disclose her 9-day employment with F.

• Plaintiff alleged that the real cause of the sacking was her trade union activities, which was automatically unfair dismissal under (forerunner to) s.152.

• CA allowed her claim, saying that the scope of s.152 extends to possible future union activities that the employer believes the employee will participate in, and there does not need to be a particular / precise activity that the employer takes exception to. 

Woolf LJ

• The purpose of the subsection…is to protect those who engage in trade union activities and I can see no reason why that should not apply irrespective of whether the precise activities can be identified.