The tribunal set out the relevant principles for assessing awards for injury to feelings for unlawful discrimination. The principles are: ‘(1) Awards for injury to feelings are compensatory. They should be just to both parties. They should compensate fully without punishing the tortfeasor. Feelings of indignation should not be allowed to inflate the award.
(2) Awards should not be too low, as that would diminish respect for the policy of the anti-discrimination legislation. Society has condemned discrimination and awards must ensure that it is seen to be wrong. On the other hand, awards should be restrained, as excessive awards could . . be seen as the way to untaxed riches.
(3) Awards should bear some broad general similarity to the range of awards in personal injury cases. We do not think this should be done by reference to any particular type of personal injury award; rather to the whole range of such awards.
(4) In exercising their discretion in assessing a sum, tribunals should remind themselves of the value in everyday life of the sum they have in mind.
(5) Finally, tribunals should bear in mind . . the need for public respect for the level of awards made.’
As to the claim for aggravated damages: ‘It seems to us that there were here factors which entitled the tribunal to make an award of aggravated damages. In particular they identified the third appellant’s conduct of the investigation of the complaints of race discrimination. The tribunal described this as a travesty of what it should have been. Instead of providing the respondent with a remedy for the wrongs which he had suffered, the third appellants added to his injury by attributing all his problems to his own defects of personality. We think this was a true case of aggravation: a case where the appellant’s actions rubbed salt in the respondent’s wounds.’
Judges:
Smith J
Citations:
[1997] IRLR 162, [1997] ICR 275
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Zaiwalla and Co (a Firm) v Walia EAT 24-Jul-2002
The claimant sought aggravated damages for the aggressive way the respondent firm had defended her action for sex discrimination.
Held: In exceptional circumstances, and this was one, the tribunal could award additional damages where a . .
Doubted – London Borough of Hackney v Sivanandan and Others EAT 27-May-2011
EAT RACE DISCRIMINATION – Compensation
SEX DISCRIMINATION – Compensation
APPEAL
Council and a charity both supplied members to a recruitment panel which victimised the Claimant – Tribunal makes . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Damages
Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.381291