My question involves U.K. and potentially U.S. employment law:
I was fired, and have filed a lawsuit against my former employer in the High Court in London for breach of implied duty of mutual trust and confidence of the employment contract. I have also asked for a specific sum amount of money in the lawsuit. The defendant now tries to dismiss my case by arguing that the Labor Tribunal, not the High Court, should have the jurisdiction.
I can list at least three previous cases where the employees sued their former employers for breach of implied duty of mutual trust and confidence of the employment contract and have asked for specific amount of money. The circumstances under which the employment termination occurred are same as mine (Let's just say I am right about this aspect for now), and the High Court had accepted and ruled the cases.
My question is: Can I use the fact that cases of similar nature were previously accepted by the High Court as an argument that the High Court should also have jurisdiction over my case? If so, what are the relevant legal terms in this kind of arguments (e.g. binding ???). In general, how do U.S. lawyers go about using cases previously accepted by courts to argue for jurisdiction of similar cases in the future?
Thanks.
I was fired, and have filed a lawsuit against my former employer in the High Court in London for breach of implied duty of mutual trust and confidence of the employment contract. I have also asked for a specific sum amount of money in the lawsuit. The defendant now tries to dismiss my case by arguing that the Labor Tribunal, not the High Court, should have the jurisdiction.
I can list at least three previous cases where the employees sued their former employers for breach of implied duty of mutual trust and confidence of the employment contract and have asked for specific amount of money. The circumstances under which the employment termination occurred are same as mine (Let's just say I am right about this aspect for now), and the High Court had accepted and ruled the cases.
My question is: Can I use the fact that cases of similar nature were previously accepted by the High Court as an argument that the High Court should also have jurisdiction over my case? If so, what are the relevant legal terms in this kind of arguments (e.g. binding ???). In general, how do U.S. lawyers go about using cases previously accepted by courts to argue for jurisdiction of similar cases in the future?
Thanks.
Getting Fired: Arguing for Court Jurisdiction in Wrongful Dismissal Lawsuit
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire