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

O’Brien v Associated Fire Alarms [1968] 1 WLR 1916

By Oxbridge Law TeamUpdated 07/01/2024 07:25

Judgement for the case O’Brien v Associated Fire Alarms

Table Of Contents

  • Plaintiff worked at Defendant’s Liverpool branch. There was a shortage of work there and Plaintiff refused Defendant’s request to move to another branch.

  • He was sacked, and Plaintiff claimed this was redundancy (which Defendant contested so as to avoid paying redundancy pay).

  • CA held that, since there was no ‘mobility’ clause in Plaintiff’s contract, whether express or implied, he could not have been sacked for breaching his contract. Rather, the dismissal must have been on grounds of redundancy. 

Any comments or edits about this case? Get in touch

For Further Study on O’Brien v Associated Fire Alarms

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...