Brodtkorb referred to the case of which Beedell v West Printers Ltd she sees as holding a great prospect for a refined RORR test as it “may offer an appropriate middle ground for the role of the RORR test in unfair dismissal law.” In this case, the EAT was of the opinion that the RORR test should be based on the standard set out in Bolam v Friern and subsequently modified in Hospital Management Committee Bolitho v In this medical negligence case, it City and Hackney Health Authority. was established that the decision of a medical practitioner was to be adjudged against that of a reasonably competent medical practitioner. The modification in is to the effect that a practice could well be Bolitho considered to be negligent even if it is supported by a body of medical practitioners. Conclusively, the concerns raised the courts current practice to the interest of employees and the public are real. However, the cautious approach adopted by the court is not without reason. Going forward, it is therefore proposed that judges should be open to more worthy alternatives whilst at the same time steering clear of an employer’s managerial prerogative. BIBLIOGRAPHY A Sanders, Expanding The No-Difference Rule in the Law of Unfair ‘ ’ Dismissal (2007) 36 Industrial Law Journal 355 M Wynn, Dismissal The Ghost of Resurrected?” (1994) Byrne “Unfair – 24 272 Industrial Law Journal S Fredman and S. Lee Unacceptable Faith of Proceduralism” “The (1986) 15 15 Industrial Law Journal E Hendy, dismissal law changes - unfair?” (2012) Industrial Law “Unfair Journal 146 K Brearley, Comment: Employers - are you fair? (2000) 11 “Case International Company and Commercial Law Review 260-263 T Brodtkorb. misconduct and UK unfair dismissal law does “Employee the range of reasonable responses test require reform?” (2010) 52 International Journal of Law and Management 429-450 A range of reasonable responses test - from guidelines to “The statute”, (1998) 27 Industrial Law Journal, 335-42 C Sheffield Comment: The reasonable response test in unfair “Case dismissal (2003) Coventry Law Journal L Vickers Comment Unfair dismissal and rights” (2004) 33 “Case Industrial Law Journal 52-58
Brodtkorb referred to the case of Beedell v West Printers Ltd which she sees as holding a great prospect for a refined RORR test as it “may offer an appropriate middle ground for the role of the RORR test in unfair dismissal law.” In this case, the EAT was of the opinion that the RORR test should be based on the standard set out in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee and subsequently modified in Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority. In this medical negligence case, it was established that the decision of a medical practitioner was to be adjudged against that of a reasonably competent medical practitioner. The modification in Bolitho is to the effect that a practice could well be considered to be negligent even if it is supported by a body of medical practitioners. Conclusively, the concerns raised the courts current practice to the interest of employees and the public are real. However, the cautious approach adopted by the court is not without reason. Going forward, it is therefore proposed that judges should be open to more worthy alternatives whilst at the same time steering clear of an employer’s managerial prerogative. BIBLIOGRAPHY A Sanders, Expanding The ‘ No-Difference ’ Rule in the Law of Unfair Dismissal (2007) 36 Industrial Law Journal 355 M Wynn, “Unfair Dismissal – The Ghost of Byrne Resurrected?” (1994) 24 Industrial Law Journal 272 S Fredman and S. Lee “The Unacceptable Faith of Proceduralism” (1986) 15 Industrial Law Journal 15 E Hendy, “Unfair dismissal law changes - unfair?” (2012) Industrial Law Journal 146 K Brearley, “Case Comment: Employers - are you fair? (2000) 11 International Company and Commercial Law Review 260-263 T Brodtkorb. “Employee misconduct and UK unfair dismissal law does the range of reasonable responses test require reform?” (2010) 52 International Journal of Law and Management 429-450 A “The range of reasonable responses test - from guidelines to statute”, (1998) 27 Industrial Law Journal, 335-42 C Sheffield “Case Comment: The reasonable response test in unfair dismissal (2003) Coventry Law Journal L Vickers “Case Comment Unfair dismissal and rights” (2004) 33 Industrial Law Journal 52-58
The-Range-of-Reasonable-Response.docx