Disability Discrimination / Practice and Procedure By a majority decision, new evidence was admitted on appeal. ET did not err when it focused on and found at a preliminary hearing on disability no physical impairment pursuant to Directions given at a directions hearing and concluded in any event, there was no evidence of a mental … Continue reading Whyte v First Capital East Ltd: EAT 22 Mar 2005
The child was subject to the school eventually declined to clean and change him. The mother claimed that the school was discriminating. Held: The mother had understated the frequency of the bowel accidents. The school was not properly equipped to deal with them. The school head concluded that it could not sustain the placement out … Continue reading K v The School and the Special Needs and Disability Tribunal: CA 6 Mar 2007
EAT Deposit ordered. Order lost in post due to the Claimant putting wrong post-code on ET1. Review. Distinguishing Judgments from Orders. Strike-out. Extending time. Judges: His Honour Peter Clark Citations: [2005] UKEAT 0318 – 05 – 2907, UKEAT/0319/05/TM, UKEAT/0318/05/TM, [2005] ICR 1647, UKEAT/0320/05/TM, [2005] IRLR 836 Links: Bailii, EATn Statutes: Employment Tribunal Rules 2004 20(1) … Continue reading Sodexho Ltd v Gibbons: EAT 14 Jul 2005
EAT Time Limits – Just and equitable extension. Employment Tribunal correct in finding that the evidence before it did not explain why the Claimant had not made an application for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The Claimant did not appear and did not give evidence himself. In these circumstances the Employment Tribunal decision was a … Continue reading Chouafi v London United Busways Ltd: EAT 11 May 2005
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – DEDUCED EFFECT ET concluded that Sch 1 para 6 of DDA (Deduced Effect) did not apply where applicant had pins and plate inserted for ankle fracture in 1984 and no continuing treatment. Remitted to same Tribunal to consider (on further medical evidence if necessary) whether the pins/plate amounted to continuing measures. … Continue reading Carden v Pickerings Europe Ltd: EAT 25 Apr 2005
EAT Practice and Procedure – 2002 Act and pre-action requirements. Regulation 14 2004 Regulations; excluding discrimination Questionnaires from definition of statutory grievance. When failure to comply with SGP may be raised. Whether SGP requirement offends European Law.The Regulations cannot be circumvented by contending that the grievance identified in the preamble to the questions can be … Continue reading D Holc-Gale v Makers UK Ltd: EAT 30 Nov 2005
ECJ Grand Chamber – Directive 1999/70/EC – Clauses 2, 5 and 8 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work – Directive 2000/78/EC – Article 6 – Equal treatment as regards employment and occupation – Age discrimination.A provision of German labour law excluding protection for short term contracts for those who were over 52 when they … Continue reading Mangold v Helm: ECJ 22 Nov 2005
EAT Disability Discrimination: Reasonable Adjustments and Justification; Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of Dismissal The Employment Tribunal is correct in finding that as employer did not regard the employee as disabled and took no steps to consider reasonable adjustments, it was entitled to find that the employer was in breach of sections 5(1) and 5(2) of the … Continue reading Southampton City College v Randall: EAT 22 Sep 2005
EAT Disability Discrimination: Disability -and- Practice and Procedure: Review New point allowed on appeal – deemed past disability under the Disability Discrimination Act, Schedule 1, para 7. Original judgment reviewable once the point was taken in review application. Appeal allowed: declaration Employment Tribunal have jurisdiction in Disability Discrimination Act claim. Judges: His Honour Judge Peter … Continue reading Slaney v Culina Logistick Gmbh T/A Cullina Logistics: EAT 21 Oct 2005
EAT Contract of Employment and Disability Discrimination – Disability Discrimination – reasonable adjustments – whether a duty to carry out assessment before offering job on trial basis. Interpretation of ‘return to work’ policy. Judges: Bean J Citations: [2005] UKEAT 0228 – 05 – 2707 Links: Bailii Employment Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231319
EAT The Employment Tribunal was wrong to find that the Respondent had discriminated against the Claimant under Section 6(1) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 because it omitted to find what arrangements made by or on behalf of the Respondent, or which physical feature of the Respondent’s premises, placed the Claimant at a substantial disadvantage. … Continue reading Smiths Detection – Watford Ltd v Berriman: EAT 9 Aug 2005
EAT Practice and Procedure -and- Unfair Dismissal No error of law in Employment Tribunal (1) finding that Appellant had been fairly dismissed for some other substantial reason and not because of disability and (2) the dismissal procedure had been fair. Judges: His Honour Judge Birtles Citations: [2005] UKEAT 0061 – 05 – 1807, 0061/05 Links: … Continue reading Neary v Egerton-Rothesay Ltd: EAT 18 Jul 2005
The court recognised a distinction between educational and non-educational provision as it affected a statement of special educational needs. Judge LJ: ‘Consistent with the relevant statutory provision, Part 3 of the Statement must make provision for the educational needs specified in Part 2: no more, no less. Provision is not required to be made in … Continue reading W v Leeds City Council and SENDIST: CA 29 Jul 2005
The claimant said that his employer had failed to respect his right to express his beliefs by obliging him, though a Christian, to work on Sundays. Held: The appeal failed. ‘The Commission’s position on Article 9, as I understand it, is that, so far as working hours are concerned, an employer is entitled to keep … Continue reading Copsey v WWB Devon Clays Ltd: CA 25 Jul 2005
EAT Practice and Procedure -and- Disability DiscriminationAppellant’s application to raise a new point on appeal (that the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 applies to Disability Discrimination Act 1995 section 8(3) damages) was refused as the Employment Tribunal had already decided, at its liability hearing, to deduct 40% from unfair dismissal compensation and had not … Continue reading The Blackpool Fylde and Wyre Society for the Blind v Begg: EAT 31 Mar 2005
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs – Case management – Claim for disability discrimination and breach of contract. Preliminary hearing at which claimants’ solicitors found liable in expenses and pre hearing review fixed under Rule 7 of Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2001. Claimant appealed against both … Continue reading Ibrahim v Ethnic Minority Enterprise Centre and others: EAT 18 May 2005
EAT Practice and Procedure Alleged perversity by Employment Tribunal in the findings of fact rejecting claims of disability and sex discrimination. No basis for such appeal at all; nor for the suggestion that by cross-referring to the findings of fact on disability discrimination the Employment Tribunal in any way failed to consider the similar allegations … Continue reading Parmar v McDonald Restaurants Ltd: EAT 13 Apr 2005
Disability discrimination and unfair dismissal. Judges: Pill LJ, May LJ, Ouseley J Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 598 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Stockton on Tees Borough Council v Aylott EAT 11-Mar-2009 EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS Extension of time: just and equitable2002 Act and pre-action requirements DISABILITY DISCRIMINATIONDisability related discrimination Direct disability … Continue reading Home Office v Collins: CA 19 May 2005
The claimant had been dismissed by reason of disability and so was entitled to compensation for the associated psychological injury. She was then dismissed unfairly, and the employer sought to argue that the dismissal constituted a novus actus and ended the period for which she was entitled to compensation for loss of earnings. Held: An … Continue reading Beart v HM Prison Service: CA 26 Apr 2005
EAT Disability Discrimination – Reasonable adjustments Judges: His Honour Judge Reid QC Citations: UKEAT/0609/04/CK, [2005] UKEAT 0609 – 04 – 0402 Links: Bailii, EAT Statutes: Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Discrimination, Employment Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.224119
The court was asked as to who was the appropriate respondent when a claim for disability discrimination is brought by a teacher employed at a maintained community school with a delegated budget. The teacher’s contract of employment is with the local education authority, but the Governing Body of such a school is given extensive employment … Continue reading Murphy v Slough Borough Council Governing Body of Langleywood School: CA 16 Feb 2005
In giving their decision, the court reminded tribunals when preparing their judgments, to make sure the reasons were user friendly. Here time had been wasted with confusion about the Roman Numerals used to number the reasons. Judges: Mummery LJ, Chadwick LJ, Tuckey LJ Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 133, Times 05-Apr-2005, [2005] IRLR 376 Links: Bailii … Continue reading Williams v J Walter Thompson Group Ltd: CA 17 Feb 2005
ECJ Social Policy – Directive 98/59/EC – Collective redundancies – Consultation with workers’ representatives – Notification to the competent public authority – Concept of ‘redundancy’ – Time at which redundancy takes effect.The ECJ observed: ‘The case in which the employer ‘is contemplating’ collective redundancies and has drawn up a ‘project’ to that end corresponds to … Continue reading Junk v Kuhnel: ECJ 27 Jan 2005
Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 1456 Links: Bailii Statutes: Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Discrimination Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.235828
Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 1220, [2006] ICR 524, [2006] IRLR 41 Links: Bailii Statutes: Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – High Quality Lifestyles Ltd v Watts EAT 10-Apr-2006 EAT The Employment Tribunal had erred in its construction of direct discrimination under s3A(5) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as … Continue reading Smith v Churchills Stairlifts Plc: CA 27 Oct 2005
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALReason for dismissalDISABILITY DISCRIMINATIONDisabilityReasonable adjustmentsUnfair dismissal and disability discrimination. Claimant employed as a service engineer and dismissed. Claimant’s case was that dismissal was both unfair and for a reason related to disability. Respondents’ case was that dismissal was fair, on grounds of misconduct. Tribunal found that dismissal was because of respondents’ perception of … Continue reading British Gas Services Ltd T/A Scottish Gas Services v Park: EAT 30 Jun 2005
UNFAIR DISMISSAL Unfair dismissal: whether or not employee dismissed. DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION Disability discrimination: whether or not reasonable adjustments made and whether or not s.693(f) required employer to make adjustment of allowing employee to be absent from work. Citations: [2005] UKEAT 0091 – 04 – 0104 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment, Discrimination Updated: 15 … Continue reading APM Contracts Ltd v Duggan and Another: EAT 1 Apr 2005
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Section 15 DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments UNFAIR DISMISSAL -Reasonableness of dismissal Disability discrimination – discrimination by means of unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability – section 15 Equality Act 2010 Disability discrimination – discrimination by means of a failure to comply with a duty to make … Continue reading Birmingham City Council v Lawrence (Disability Discrimination): EAT 2 Jun 2017
The claimant had submitted a grievance complaining in general terms of the way in which she had been treated by a manager. She did not, however, refer to a particular incident relied on in her pleading as one of the two ‘last straw’ incidents that led to her resignation. The respondent contended that by reason … Continue reading Shergold v Fieldway Medical Centre: EAT 5 Dec 2005
The court was asked, whether asked to grant possession against a disabled tenant where the grounds for possession were mandatory. The defendant was a secure tenant with a history of psychiatric disability. He had set out to buy his flat, but the council sought possession when it discovered that he had sublet. Held: Section 23(3)(c) … Continue reading London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm and Disability Rights Commission: CA 25 Jul 2007
The court considered whether discriminatory acts after the termination of employment were caught by the respective anti-discrimination Acts. The acts included a failure to give proper references. They pursued claims on the basis of victimisation after their primary discrimination claims. Held: The 1975 and 1976 Acts were similarly phrased and the wording in the 1995 … Continue reading Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions: HL 19 Jun 2003
Proving Discrimination – Two Stage Process Each appeal raised procedural issues in discrimination cases, asking where, under the new regulations, the burden of proof had shifted. Held: The new situation required a two stage process before a complaint could be upheld. First the claimant had to establish facts allowing the tribunal to conclude, in the … Continue reading Igen Ltd v Wong: CA 18 Feb 2005
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. Held: The appeal was dismissed. For Article 9 to be engaged (aside from certain other threshold conditions) the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005
Challenge to the lawfulness of the practice of the EAT in referring back to the IT deficient reasons with an invitation to expand upon them. Held: The words ‘disposing of’ in the section meant ‘dealing with conclusively’ rather than ‘regulating’. However the procedure set down in Burns was to be followed. Nothing in the rules … Continue reading Barke v Seetec Business Technology Centre Ltd: CA 16 May 2005
One claimant said that as a foreign resident pensioner, she had been excluded from the annual uprating of state retirement pension, and that this was an infringement of her human rights. Another complained at the lower levels of job-seeker’s allowance payable to those under 25. Held: (Lord Carswell dissented in part.) The claims failed. The … Continue reading Carson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Reynolds v Same: HL 26 May 2005
The claimant sought to assert race discrimination by the Labour Party in not selecting him as a political candidate. The defendant, chairman of the party appealed.
Held: A political party when selecting candidates was not acting as a . .
The issue of justification of discrimination is rarely a simple matter. No margin of appreciation was to be allowed to an employer. It is for the tribunal to make its own judgment as to whether the practice complained of by the employee was . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION Disability / Disability related discrimination / Reasonable adjustments JURISDICTIONAL POINTS >2002 Act and pre-action requirements The date of disability is a fact found by an Employment Tribunal on the basis of medical and other evidence. When a consultant gave a range of dates for the onset of a condition, the Employment Tribunal … Continue reading Cumbria Probation Board v Collingwood: EAT 28 May 2008
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – DisabilityJob offer to Claimant withdrawn allegedly as a result of her disclosing a history of depression – On a preliminary issue Tribunal holds that at the material time (June 2008) Claimant not suffering from ‘clinical depression’ amounting to a disability within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.Appeal allowed, and … Continue reading J v DLA Piper UK Llp: EAT 15 Jun 2010
DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION The Tribunal erred in concluding that, because it had found that the conduct of the Respondent which tipped the Claimant into resigning could not contribute to a breach of the implied duty of trust and confidence, his claim that he was constructively dismissed must fail. That would be correct only had it, properly, … Continue reading Williams v Alderman Davies Church In Wales Primary School Unfair Dismissal – Constructive Dismissal): EAT 20 Jan 2020
The claimant said he had suffered disability discrimination at the hands of the defendant, a barristers set. He had been accepted as a pupil, but then applied for a deferral which was refused. It was agreed that the set of chambers was a trade organisation. Held: In the light of the rights and duties of … Continue reading Higham of 1 Pump Court Chambers v Horton: CA 15 Jul 2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 8; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedingsThe applicants were an unmarried couple who could not marry, and so legitimate their daughter, the third applicant, because … Continue reading Johnston and Others v Ireland: ECHR 18 Dec 1986
The applicants complained that as an unmarried couple they had been excluded from consideration as adopters. Held: Northern Ireland legislation had not moved in the same way as it had for other jurisdictions within the UK. The greater commitment to traditional family structures did not however justify the difference. The rules were unlawful discrimination.Lord Hoffmann … Continue reading In re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G: HL 18 Jun 2008
ECJ The court considered the measure of compensation in a successful claim for sex discrimination arising from the health authority’s provision of an earlier compulsory retirement age for women compared with that for men in the same employment. The health authority paid her the maximum sum of pounds 6,250 which was then permitted as compensation … Continue reading M H Marshall v Southampton And South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching): ECJ 26 Feb 1986
The female civilian officer alleged sex discrimination against her by a police officer. Her complaint was heard at an internal disciplinary. She alleged sexual harrassment, and was further humiliated by the all male board’s treatment of her complaint. The complaint now was solely as to her treatment by the Board. Held: The body was a … Continue reading Heath v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: CA 20 Jul 2004
The authority sought to evict their tenant on the ground that he was behaving in a way which was a nuisance to neighbours. The tenant was disabled, and claimed discrimination. Held: In secure tenancies, the authority had to consider the reasonableness of making a possession order, and in situations where it was enforcing a possession … Continue reading Council of the City of Manchester v Romano, Samariz: CA 1 Jul 2004
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustmentsUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissalReasonable adjustments. The Tribunal was not entitled to hold that the Respondent was in breach of its duty to make reasonable adjustments in respects which were not identified as issues in the case. Chapman v Simon [1994] IRLR 124 and Tarbuck v Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Limited [2006] … Continue reading Newcastle City Council v Spires: EAT 22 Feb 2011
The claimant appealed against the strike out of her case for failing to comply with an order requiring her to submit to medical examination and otherwise to pursue her disability discrimination claim. Held: The claimant’s further application for an adjournment was denied. There had been consistent and repeated failure to co-operate with the tribunals and … Continue reading Chambers-Mills v Allied Bakeries: CA 21 Feb 2011
Tribunal procedure and practice (including UT) – statements of reasons Citations: [2010] UKUT 10 (AAC) Links: Bailii Citing: Cited – Alloway, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Bromley Admn 17-Sep-2008 The claimant, a young autistic adult, sought judicial review of an assesment carried out for the respondent under the 2000 Act as … Continue reading DC v London Borough of Ealing: UTAA 11 Jan 2010
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Application/claim AmendmentVICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION An originating application must be read as a whole to ascertain whether it contains a particular complaint. The Claimant who was black and dyslexic completed an ET1 without legal assistance. He ticked the Disability and the Race boxes in paragraph 6.1. In the particulars of complaint in Box … Continue reading Baker v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: EAT 5 Feb 2010
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Reasonable adjustmentsThe Claimant suffered from plantar fasciitis and asthma. The Tribunal found disability discrimination in that the employer had failed to make reasonable adjustments in that (1) it did not discount a period of absence caused by plantar fasciitis in 2005 (at a time when neither party realised that the Claimant’s foot … Continue reading Royal Mail Group Ltd v Hunkin: EAT 27 Jul 2009
Acting on guidance, the parties representatives and the tribunal had assumed that part of the award relating to loss of future earnings would not be taxable. The question now was whether the tribunal had power of its own motion to review its decision. Held: ‘There is a difference between saying that a case to which … Continue reading Williams v Ferrosan Ltd: EAT 5 Mar 2004
EAT STATUTORY DISCIPLINE AND GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES Whether infringed The employment judge held that the two claimants had complied with the statutory grievance procedures and that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear their claims for constructive unfair dismissal. He did so, however, in part by treating an ET1 as constituting a grievance. That was contrary to … Continue reading Step In Time Ltd v Fox and Another: EAT 3 Nov 2008
EAT Sex Discrimination – Inferring DiscriminationThe claimant sought compenstion for sex discrimination. She appealed a finding of a material factor justifying the difference in pay. Held: The new provisions included reference to the Code of Practice issued by the Equal Opportunities Commission, which provided that the employer should provide a transparent system for setting pay … Continue reading Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd: EAT 6 Mar 2003
NIIT The decision of the tribunal is that:-(1) The claimant’s claims of discrimination on the grounds of disability and breach of contract are dismissed, following withdrawal made orally to the tribunal.(2) The claimant is not entitled to present her claim of sex discrimination to the tribunal, in view of the provisions of Article 19(2) of … Continue reading Dunn v Chief Constable of PSNI: NIIT 11 Dec 2007
EAT Practice and Procedure – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-BarkeDisposal of appeal including remission Disability Discrimination – Reasonable adjustmentsUnfair Dismissal – Constructive dismissalEmployment Tribunal reasons – duty to make reasonable adjustments – Constructive dismissal. Remission to same Employment Tribunal.HHJ Peter Clark said: ‘ The proper approach for an Employment Tribunal to take when considering an alleged breach of … Continue reading Avon and Somerset Constabulary v Dolan: EAT 22 Apr 2008
EAT Disability discrimination – Reasonable adjustments/Justification1. The employers appealed against two findings by the Tribunal that they had failed to make reasonable adjustments for her disability and against the finding that their admittedly disability-related dismissal of the employee was not justified.2. The first adjustment which the Tribunal concluded the employers ought to have made and … Continue reading London Borough of Camden v Price-Job: EAT 18 Dec 2007
EAT Disability discrimination: Less favourable treatment / Harassment Practice and Procedure: Application/claim / Amendment The Tribunal applied wrong tests in respect of disability related discrimination. On the application of the right tests, based on the Tribunal’s findings of fact, its conclusions were clearly correct in respect of two claims, but three claims were remitted to … Continue reading A Blitz v Equant Integration Services Ltd (T/A Orange Business Services): EAT 2 Nov 2007
EAT Practice and Procedure: 2002 Act and Pre-action Requirements Various questions relating to s.32 of the Employment Act 2002 and the Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004. Chairman’s reasoning wrong in the light of the subsequent decision of the EAT in London Borough of Hounslow v Miller. However, for other reasons in most respects … Continue reading Alford House and others v McDonald: EAT 11 Oct 2007
The claimant was a Pakistani member of the Labour Party. He had sought selection as parliamentary candidate, but allegations had been made about behaviour of members in the Pakistani community in his ward and the local party had been suspended. A candidate was deliberately chosen who was not a member of that community. The claimant … Continue reading Watt (Formerly Carter) v Ahsan: HL 21 Nov 2007
The employer appealed an order extending the time for the claimant to claim disability discrimination. The claimant had been suspended pending disciplinary proceedings, but became subject to severe depression, and his doctors said he was unfit to face a hearing. An adjourned hearing went ahead in his absence, and he was dismissed in January 2005. … Continue reading Department of Constitutional Affairs v Jones: CA 18 Jul 2007
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: ReviewJURISDICTIONAL POINTS: 2002 Act and pre-action requirementsThe Tribunal held (a) that Appellant’s unfair dismissal claim was out of time and (b) that she had not previously lodged a grievance relating to her disability discrimination claim, so that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction by virtue of s.32 of the Employment Act 2002. … Continue reading Sadare v London Borough of Lambeth: EAT 6 Apr 2009
EAT PART TIME WORKERSA police officer was found by the Tribunal to be significantly disadvantaged compared with his peers when carrying out examinations for promotion. Nonetheless, the Tribunal held that he was not disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 because that was not a normal day-to-day activity. In so far as … Continue reading Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: EAT 23 Jul 2007
EAT Practice and Procedure – 2002 Act and Pre-action Requirements Unfair Dismissal – Constructive Dismissal On 14 October 2004 the Claimant claimed constructive unfair dismissal arising out of four acts of the Respondent. No grievance pursuant to the 2004 Regulations had been presented. The Employment Tribunal allowed the case to proceed at a pre-hearing review … Continue reading Cyprus Airways Ltd v Lambrou: EAT 1 May 2007
EAT Equal Pay Act – Part time pensions Practice and Procedure – Appellate jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke The EAT exercised its discretion to allow a point conceded at the Employment Tribunal to be reopened on appeal. The exceptional circumstances included the fact that the issue went to jurisdiction, these were four test cases representing 120 similar concessions in … Continue reading Secretary of State for Health v Rance: EAT 4 May 2007
The claimant had been dismissed for ill health. He complained to the Tribunal that he had been unfairly dismissed. The grounds of his application amount to a complaint of constructive dismissal. In summary, he was saying that he was being treated by the District Council in a manner which he found degrading, demoralising and upsetting, … Continue reading East Lindsey District Council v Daubney: EAT 20 Apr 1977
The claimant appealed dismissals of his claim for race discrimination, harassment and victimisation. In a new job, other team members said they were uncomfortable alone with him, and his probationary period was extended because of his failure to fit in. He said the tribunal had erred in failing to apply the two stage test set … Continue reading Brown v London Borough of Croydon and Another: CA 26 Jan 2007
The claimant appealed against adverse findings on her claims of sex discrimination. The court considered questions arising from the provisions relating to the transfer of the burden of proof in a discrimination case. Held: Questions of the burden of proof are very common in discrimination cases: ‘The factual content of the cases does not simply … Continue reading Madarassy v Nomura International Plc: CA 26 Jan 2007
EAT The ET dismissed as premature the Claimant”s application for disability discrimination because the application was made less than 28 days after the Claimant”s grievance had been raised in a letter dated 21st April 2005. In fact there was an earlier letter that constituted a written grievance that was before the ET but its significance … Continue reading Pugh v National Assembly for Wales: EAT 26 Sep 2006
The council had dismissed all workers within a group of employees, and invited them to re-apply for their jobs. The council now appealed a protective award made on the basis that there had been inadequate consultation with the union. Held: The court refused permission to raise a new point of law not argued below as … Continue reading Unison v Leicestershire County Council: CA 29 Jun 2006
The employer appealed against findings of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The employee worked in IT. He was profoundly deaf, but could lip read and read sign language. He had been accused of obtaining improper access to a senior staff member’s emails. During the disciplinary hearing, he had been assisted by an interpreter for part … Continue reading Taylor v OCS Group Ltd: CA 31 May 2006
The defendant tenant appealed an order for possession of her flat. She was disabled and living with her 19 year old son. He had been made subject to an anti-social behaviour order. The court had found that she could have required him to leave. The tenant alleged disability discrimination. Held: As to the relevance of … Continue reading Knowsley Housing Trust v McMullen: CA 9 May 2006
EAT The Employment Tribunal had erred in its construction of direct discrimination under s3A(5) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as amended when it failed to construct a correct hypothetical comparator for the Claimant who was an HIV+ care worker dismissed because of the risk of transmission to users of the Respondent’s health care facilities. … Continue reading High Quality Lifestyles Ltd v Watts: EAT 10 Apr 2006
EAT Practice and Procedure – striking-out/dismissal Grievance procedures. Were they complied with? Held not to be in the circumstances of this case. Observations on what counts as compliance and how Employment Tribunal should approach the question whether a grievance has been made about a relevant complaint.Elias P said: ‘It seems to me that the objective … Continue reading Canary Wharf Management Limited v Edebi: EAT 3 Mar 2006
EAT Practice and Procedure – 2002 Act and Pre-Action Requirements; and Amendment Whether section 32(4) EA 2002 – original time limit – restricts time for bringing a DDA claim to the primary 3 months period, or whether the just and equitable discretion under DDA Schedule 3 Part 3 may be exercised. It is the latter. … Continue reading BUPA Care Homes v Cann; Spillett v Tesco Stores: EAT 31 Jan 2006
The claimant said that the airline and airport had failed to provide proper access arrangements for him as a disabled person. No wheelchair had been provided to transfer him through the airport to the airplane. Held: It was the duty of both defendants to provide such facilities. It was no defence that better facilities were … Continue reading Ross v Ryanair Ltd and Another: CA 21 Dec 2004
The court considered the test for reasonableness in a procedure for selection for redundancy. Peter Clarke J said: ‘As to whether a reasonable employer would or would not consult with an individual employee is, it seems to us, essentially a question of fact for the industrial jury, properly directing itself.’ and ‘It is in these … Continue reading Mugford v Midland Bank Plc: EAT 23 Jan 1997
EAT Disability Discrimination – Less favourable treatment. – Dismissal of claim for disability discrimination on basis that Applicant not disabled.(i) No perversity and proper application of Morgan in finding that the mental impairment was not a clinically well-recognised illness. (ii) It is inappropriate to give a rolled-up answer to the 3 questions of (a) effect … Continue reading Wilson v Southern Counties Fuels Ltd: EAT 12 Jul 2004
DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Compensation DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Loss/mitigation DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Burden of proof The Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 can apply to some discrimination claims, but reduction of an award for contributory negligence would rarely, if ever, be justified because of the difficulties in applying the concept of ‘fault’ to the victim of … Continue reading First Greater Western Ltd and Another v Waiyego: EAT 6 Dec 2018
EAT The claimant had presented claims of sex and disability discrimination and victimisation. She suffered injury to her throat when builders demolished a wall near her workstation. Held: The employer’s appeal was dismissed. ‘There must be many cases in which the disabled person has been placed at a substantial disadvantage in the workplace, but in … Continue reading Mid-Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust v Cambridge: EAT 4 Mar 2003
The claimant Reynolds challenged the differential treatment by age of jobseeker’s allowance. Carson complained that as a foreign resident pensioner, her benefits had not been uprated. The questions in each case were whether the benefit affected a ‘possession’ within the Convention or the discrimination was arbitrary so as to breach the applicants human rights. Held: … Continue reading Carson and Reynolds v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 17 Jun 2003
EAT Jurisdiction – appeal from an Employment Tribunal held at Ashford, Kent, who, following a Preliminary Hearing on 27 February 2002, unanimously decided that the named second Respondents, Kent County Council, should be dismissed from the proceedings. Judges: His Hon Judge Ansell Citations: EAT/447/02, [2003] EAT 0447 – 02 – 1803, [2003] UKEAT 0447 – … Continue reading Green v The Governing Body Victoria Road Primary School Kent County Council: EAT 24 Feb 2003
A law permitted local authorities to oblige landowners to transfer hunting rights over private land to approved hunting associations. The landowners could not prevent hunting on their property. Landowners so affected were made members automatically of the hunting association so that they could now hunt over other land also subject to the same new access … Continue reading Chassagnou and Others v France: ECHR 29 Apr 1999
The dismissal by a Roman Catholic school of a teacher who was pregnant by a priest, was on the grounds of pregnancy, and for an inadmissible reason. The pregnancy was an effective cause of the adverse treatment of the Appellant by her employer. Judges: Mummery P Citations: Gazette 12-Sep-1996, Times 07-Jun-1996, [1996] IRLR 372, [1996] … Continue reading O’Neill v Governors of St Thomas More Roman Catholic Voluntary Aided Upper School: EAT 7 Jun 1996
A tribunal considering a claim of disability discrimination should best consider the various statutory elements in the order given in the Act, so as to avoid confusion in unraveling what is a complex statutory structure. The wide language of section 6(2) and 6(3) is capable of applying to a ‘dismissal situation’. Although section 6 makes … Continue reading Morse v Wiltshire County Council: EAT 1 May 1998
Housing benefit regulations had been found unlawful and were amended. The Court now considered what payments should have been made before the amendments came into effect. Held: The appeal was allowed, and RR’s housing benefit entitlement is to be recalculated without making the under-occupancy deduction of 14%. There is nothing unconstitutional about a public authority, … Continue reading RR v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 13 Nov 2019
A coalmine owner claimed statutory compensation against a water undertaking which had, under its statutory authority, prevented him mining his coal over a period during which the price of coal had risen. The House was asked whether the coal should be valued as at the beginning of the period or at its value during the … Continue reading Bwllfa and Merthyr Dare Steam Collieries (1891) Ltd v Pontypridd Waterworks Co: HL 1903
The claimant sought damages for repudiation of a charterparty. The charterpary had been intended to continue until 2005. The charterer repudiated the contract and that repudiation was accepted, but before the arbitrator could set his award, the Iraq war broke out, under which the charterer could have terminated the charter as of right. The defendant … Continue reading Golden Strait Corporation v Nippon Yusen Kubishka Kaisha (‘The Golden Victory’): HL 28 Mar 2007
The court set out what was expected of an employer undertaking a dismissal on ill-health grounds. Philips J emphasised the importance of scrutinising all the relevant factors:- ‘Every case depends on its own circumstances. The basis question which has to be determined in every case is whether, in all the circumstances, the employer can be … Continue reading Spencer v Paragon Wallpapers Ltd: 1976
Former KGB officers had been banned from employment in a range of public and private sector jobs, including as lawyers, notaries, bank employees and in the teaching profession. They complained of infringement of Article 8 taken alone and also in conjunction with Article 14. The Government submitted that Article 8 was not applicable as it … Continue reading Sidabras and Dziautas v Lithuania: ECHR 27 Jul 2004
The industrial tribunal had refused the applicant an extension of time. Held: The Tribunal mistook the law in holding that it could grant a review of its decision because the employee’s case had not been properly argued at the preliminary hearing as a result of her representative’s shortcomings. It would not be in the interests … Continue reading Lindsay v Ironsides Ray and Vials: EAT 27 Jan 1994
(Grand Chamber) The claimants said that differences between the sexes in the payment of reduced earning allowances and retirement allowances were sex discrimination. Held: The differences were not infringing sex discrimination. The differences arose from the differences in pensionable ages for men and women introduced in 1940 in order to help remedy severe social inequalities … Continue reading Stec and Others v United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Apr 2006
Separated parents shared the care of their child. The father complained that all the Child Tax Credit was given to the mother. Held: The appeal failed. Although the rule does happen to be indirectly discriminatory against fathers, the complaint would be exactly the same if it did not discriminate between the sexes. Mothers who share … Continue reading Humphreys v Revenue and Customs: SC 16 May 2012
The plaintiff complained that the respondent had described its drink ‘Babycham’ as a champagne perry, which it said was a misuse of the appellation ‘champagne’. Held: The court considered the effect of European legislation on the law of England and Wales. Lord Denning MR said: ‘But when we come to matters with a European element, … Continue reading Bulmer (HP) Ltd v Bollinger SA: CA 1974
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court. Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. Tanfern was limited to appeals from … Continue reading Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002
The 1987 Regulations provided additional benefits for disabled persons, but excluded from benefit those who had nowhere to sleep. The claimant said this was irrational. He had been receiving the disability premium to his benefits, but this was cancelled when he lost his home. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The disabilty premium, as part of … Continue reading RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 22 Oct 2008
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable harm for the purposes of an action of damages for personal injury. Held: The insurers’ appeals failed. … Continue reading AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011
Extended Determinate Sentence created Other Status The prisoner was subject to an extended determinate sentence (21 years plus 4) for 10 offences of rape. He complained that as such he would only be eligible for parole after serving two thirds of his sentence rather than one third, and said that this was discriminatory. Held: The … Continue reading Stott, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 28 Nov 2018
Several lone parents challenged the benefits cap, saying that it was discriminatory. Held: (Hale, Kerr LL dissenting) The parents’ appeals failed. The legislation had a clear impact on lone parents and their children. The intention was to encourage claimants back into work. It was said that thus contradicted the other policy of providing no free … Continue reading DA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 15 May 2019
