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
Complaint was made within time limit when the decision complained of was a reconsideration of an earlier decision, not just a reference back to it. Held: In a sex discrimination case, where there has been a constructive dismissal, time runs from the date of the employer’s breach and not from the date of the employee’s … Continue reading Cast v Croydon College: CA 19 Mar 1998
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
Can an employer’s failure to make adjustments to accommodate a disabled employee be unreasonable but justified? Held: The justification under 5(2)(b) must be something other than the circumstances which are taken into account for the purpose of section 6(1): ‘The clear purpose of s.5(5) is to deny to an employer who has treated a disabled … Continue reading Collins v Royal National Theatre Board Limited: CA 17 Feb 2004
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
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
The employer appealed against a decision by the tribunal that it had jurisdiction to hear the complaints of sex discrimination. The tribunal had extended the time for the claim on the just and equitable basis. Held: The EAT set out five criteria for answering whether to extend time: ‘(a) the length of and reasons for … Continue reading British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others: EAT 26 Mar 1997
EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION: Vicarious liability Sexual harassment claim by an employee of an education authority. Circumstances in which tribunal had misdirected itself as to its own prior judgment and erred in continuing the claim straight to a remedies hearing when an issue of time bar, and, depending on the resolution of that issue, an issue … Continue reading Dundee City Council v Malcolm: EAT 25 Jul 2008
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Reasonable adjustments
Effect of Malcolm: on the facts of the case the decision in Malcolm did not make any difference to the conclusion. There is no requirement in law to set . .
