The Claimant is a consultant who succeeded in some of his protected disclosure detriment claims against the Respondent, who operate a hospital, where he carried out private practice as a ‘worker’. The Claimant resigned his practising privileges with the Respondent. The Tribunal erred in law because in finding that the Claimant would suffer very substantial career long loss of private practice earnings the Tribunal (1) failed to determine the Respondent’s argument that the Claimant’s loss was not caused by the protected disclosure detriments found against it (2) made inconsistent findings as to whether there was a risk that the hospital operated by the Respondent would close in the future (3) in effect decided it was certain that the Claimant would have taken over the lucrative practice of another surgeon when he retired, failing to take account of a relevant factor, that he might not, and (4) decided that the Claimant’s future private practice earnings were limited to just over a third of what he could have earned with the Respondent because it was not ‘realistic’ to expect him to relocate, which was perverse on the basis of the limited analysis that the Tribunal gave to this issue.
Citations:
[2021] UKEAT 0366 – 19 – 2502
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.661691
