EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL ; Reason for
POLKEY DEDUCTION
EQUALITY ACT 2010 CLAIMS – SECTION 20 REASONABLE ADJUSTMENTS SECTION 13 DIRECT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION AND SECTION 15 DISCRIMINATION ARISING FROM DISABILITY
The claimant was employed for almost 37 years by the respondents, his parents, who were partners in a joinery and funeral director enterprise. He was dismissed at a time when a sale of the business was contemplated and competing claims to purchase it had been made by the claimant and by his son who was also an employee. At the time of dismissal the claimant had been absent from work for a period of almost three years following a serious accident. The Tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed but only in respect of the respondents’ complete failure to undertake any proper procedure before dismissal.
The Tribunals’ findings and conclusions on the reason for the dismissal being the breakdown in the relationship between the claimant and his son, the Polkey deduction and the Equality Act claims were all those it was entitled to make on the evidence led. The arguments on appeal had illustrated that a different view of the evidence could have been taken but no material errors of law or approach had been identified.
Appeal dismissed.
Judges:
Wise H
Citations:
[2017] UKEAT 0013 – 16 – 1207
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.605322
