This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

North Riding Garages v Butterwick [1967] 2 QB 56

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 07/01/2024 07:24

Judgement for the case North Riding Garages v Butterwick

Table Of Contents

  • Plaintiff was sacked because he couldn’t cope with new practices required by the new owners of a business, including increased paperwork and giving estimates to customers in advance. Plaintiff then employed a new manager.

  • Defendant argued that he had been made redundant and was therefore entitled to redundancy payment.

  • Divisional Court rejected this claim, saying that the requirement of greater efficiency did not correspond to any of the circumstances that might indicate redundancy (reduction of work, cessation of business, reduction of a kind of work, etc.).

    • There was merely a need for a workshop manager with different skills, not a loss of the need for a manager. 

Widgery J

  • There is a difference between requiring a new kind of work (he says that if car manufacturers start using metal instead of wood, then the woodworkers may become redundant) and greater efficiency in the same kind of work. 

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on North Riding Garages v Butterwick

Labour Law Notes
1,003 total pages
273 purchased

Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...

Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.

Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️

Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.

Get Started
Claim every advantage to get a first in law
Labour Law Notes
1,003 total pages
273 purchased

Labour Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge...