EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL
SEX DISCRIMINATION – Comparison
Unfair dismissal – misconduct. Claimant assaulted girlfriend (also RBS employee) in circumstances where he alleged he had been provoked by her having slapped him. Sex discrimination. Circumstances in which Employment Tribunal were held to have erred in requiring misconduct, for the purposes of s.98(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, to be ‘reprehensible’, to have been perverse in its conclusion that the Claimant was not dismissed for a reason relating to conduct, to have failed to address the question of whether, esto there was procedural failing, under s.98A(2) the dismissal was nonetheless fair, to have erred in finding that the appeal process did not cure any earlier procedural defect and to have substituted its own view as to the adequacy of the procedure. Further, the Employment Tribunal had no basis for finding that the Claimant’s girlfriend was an appropriate comparator nor any basis in the evidence for concluding that the Respondent acted on the basis of an ‘automatic sexist assumption’. Appeal upheld and claim dismissed.
Judges:
Lady Smith
Citations:
[2011] UKEAT 0049 – 10 – 1111
Links:
Statutes:
Employment Rights Act 1996 98(2)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450269