Category: Employment

Whitley and Another v Thompson: EAT 14 May 1998

The claimants appealed against dismissal of their allegations of sexual harassment. The tribunal had found against them on the facts.

Judges:

Lindsay J

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1169 – 97 – 1405

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206430

Stubbings v Ministry of Defence: EAT 1 May 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 415 – 98 – 0105

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Stubbings v Ministry of Defence EAT 12-Mar-1999
. .
See Also – Stubbings v Ministry of Defence EAT 21-Sep-1999
. .
See Also – Stubbings v Ministry of Defence EAT 25-Feb-2000
. .
See Also – Stubbings v Ministry of Defence EAT 7-Jun-2000
. .
See Also – Stubbings v Ministry of Defence EAT 23-Feb-2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206420

Adams v Radnorshire Women’s Aid: EAT 9 Jun 1998

Appeal by the Applicant against the remedies decision of an Industrial Tribunal sitting at Hereford following an earlier liability decision upholding her complaint of unfair dismissal against her former employer, the Respondent, Radnorshire Women’s Aid.

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 145 – 98 – 0906

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206431

Welsh v Post Office: EAT 1 May 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1139 – 97 – 0105

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206428

Morton v Eastleigh Citizens Advice Bureau: EAT 5 Apr 2019

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Postponement or Stay
The Employment Tribunal was not obliged to adjourn a Preliminary Hearing of the issue whether the Claimant had certain disabilities (in addition to the admitted disability of a binge eating disorder) either: (1) on the basis that the Claimant had not had a proper opportunity to prepare for the hearing; or (2) by reason of the Claimant’s medical condition.

Judges:

Lavender J

Citations:

[2019] UKEAT 0208 – 18 – 0504

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.635820

Ahmed v The Cardinal Hume Academies: EAT 21 Feb 2019

Disability : Harassment
The Claimant has dyspraxia. This causes the Claimant to have difficulties with handwriting. The Claimant also suffers from pain when handwriting and can only write for a few minutes at a time. He qualified as a ‘Teach First’ teacher and was appointed to teach at the Respondent’s School. However, at a meeting on 7 September 2016, the Headteacher, Mr Rowland expressed surprise at his difficulty with writing and made remarks which the Claimant perceived to amount to harassment related to disability. On 8 September 2016, the Claimant was told that he would be suspended and required to stay at home until the issues raised were considered further. The Claimant raised a grievance and subsequently resigned claiming that he had been the victim of direct disability discrimination and harassment. The Tribunal dismissed his claims finding that it was not reasonable in the circumstances for Mr Rowland’s conduct to be regarded as constituting harassment.
The Claimant appealed on the ground that the Tribunal had taken the wrong approach to harassment in that it had treated the question of whether it was reasonable for the impugned conduct to have the proscribed effect as determinative, whereas s.26(4), EqA merely required each of the factors (i.e. perception, circumstances and reasonableness) to be taken into account. The Claimant also contended that the Tribunal had erred in relation to his claim of direct disability discrimination in failing to give effect to its own finding that the reason for the Claimant’s suspension was his disability, namely his difficulty in handwriting.
Held: Appeal dismissed. As to the first ground, the Tribunal had not erred in its approach to harassment. It had applied the approach set out in Pemberton v Inwood [2018] ICR 1291 which was that if it was not reasonable for the conduct to be regarded as violating the Claimant’s dignity or creating an adverse environment for him, then it should not be found to have done so. As to the second ground, the Tribunal had not misapplied its own findings. Its conclusion was that he had been suspended because of his difficulties with handwriting. That was a finding that treatment was because of the adverse effect of an impairment or of something arising from disability; it was not a finding that the treatment was because of the disability – whether dyspraxia or some other unspecified physical or mental impairment – itself.

Citations:

[2019] UKEAT 0096 – 18 – 2102

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.635818

Price v Guest, Keen, and Nettlefolds, Ltd: HL 17 Jun 1918

On 10th March 1916 a workman who had been employed by the respondents for the preceding three years was killed by an accident in one of the respondents’ collieries. The respondents disputed the method of computing the compensation due to his dependants. From 1st to 13th July 1915 the deceased workman worked ‘day by day.’ From 14th to 21st July owing to a strike he did not work. At the end of the strike he returned to work at increased wages. The dependants claimed that during the period of strike the deceased was not employed by the respondents and the compensation fell to be computed on the basis of his subsequent earnings. The respondents contended that his employment had been continuous.
Held (dis. L. C. Finlay) that the onus of proving the discontinuance of the employment was on the appellant, and there was no evidence to establish her contention.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Finlay), Lords Atkinson and Wrenbury

Citations:

[1918] UKHL 361, 56 SLR 361

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.631478

Kitchenham v Owners of SS ‘Johannesburg’: HL 2 Jun 1911

A sailor who had gone on shore, with leave, upon his return reached the quay alongside of which his ship was lying. The gangway which was the access to his ship was properly lighted. There was no evidence whether he reached the gangway, but he fell into the water between the quay and the ship, where his drowned body was afterwards found.
Held that, although there was an accident in the course of the sailor’s employment, there was no evidence that it arose out of this employment and his widow was not entitled to compensation.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Atkinson, Shaw, and Robson

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 626, 49 SLR 626

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.619202

Hewitt v Owners of SS ‘Duchess’: HL 15 Jun 1911

A master mariner, while his ship was lying in Bangor Roads, went ashore to a pier, as he was entitled to do. It was not proved whether he went upon the ship’s business or for his own purposes. On returning to the quay he hailed his ship for a boat to convey him on board. While waiting for the boat he fell off the quay and was drowned.
Held that there was no evidence that the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment, and that his dependants were not entitled to receive compensation.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Atkinson, Gorell, and Robson

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 627, 49 SLR 627

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compenpensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.619201

Walters v Staveley Coal and Iron Co: HL 30 May 1911

The appellant’s employers made a pathway over lands belonging to them by which their workmen obtained access to their work by a route shorter than the public road. The workmen were permitted, but not bound or entitled, to use this short-cut. The pathway at a point three-quarters of a-mile from the place of work contained some steps, down which the appellant fell, injuring himself.
Held that the County Court Judge was right in deciding that the accident did not arise ‘in the course of the employment,’ and that there was no evidence upon which he could have decided the contrary.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Atkinson, Shaw, and Robson

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 623

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.619198

Rosie v Mackay: HL 13 Nov 1911

The Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906, sec. 16(1), enacts-‘This Act shall come into operation on the first day of July 1907, but, except so far as it relates to references to medical referees and proceedings consequential thereon, shall not apply in any case where the accident happened before the commencement of this Act.’ Schedule II (17) ( b) gives an appeal to the House of Lords from a decision of the Court of Session.
In an arbitration under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897, arising out of an accident which occurred on 20th November 1906, the arbiter, with consent, remitted to a medical referee, and on his report, without further evidence, gave his decision reducing the compensation previously paid by a half. The employer appealed by stated case to the Court of Session, whose decision was that compensation should be ended.
Held that the House of Lords had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal, as the words in the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906, sec. 16 (1), ‘proceedings consequential’ on references to medical referees, would not cover the case.

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 48, 49 SLR 48

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906 16(1)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.619217

The United States of America v Nolan: SC 21 Oct 2015

Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed.
Held: The appeal failed (Lord Carnworth dissenting). That the exact situation might not have been foreseen was not a proper reason for creating an exemption not founded in EU law. The legislation was territorial, and was not legisalting extra-territorially when it covered a domestic dismissal occuring technically abroad. The legislation was intended to reflect EU law, which also made no such distinction.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Mance, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath

Citations:

[2015] UKSC 63, [2016] IRLR 34, [2015] 3 WLR 1105, [2016] 1 CMLR 42, [2015] ICR 1347, [2016] 1 All ER 857, [2015] WLR(D) 441, [2016] AC 463, UKSC 2014/0073

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary

Statutes:

Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 188ff, Collective Redundancies and Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) (Amendment) Regulations 1995, State Immunity Act 1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Sengupta v Republic of India 1983
India did not appear at court to take a point on jurisdiction under the 1978 Act. The Court asked for the appointment of an amicus to assist it.
Held: The court has a duty under statute to give the effect to the immunity conferred, even though . .
Cited – Littrell v Government of the United States of America and Another (No 2) CA 24-Nov-1993
The plaintiff claimed damages for personal injuries arising from medical treatment which he had received at a United States military hospital in the United Kingdom while a serving member of the United States Air Force.
Held: Section 16(2) . .
Cited – Holland v Lampen-Wolfe HL 20-Jul-2000
The US established a base at Menwith Hill in Yorkshire, and provided educational services through its staff to staff families. The claimant a teacher employed at the base alleged that a report on her was defamatory. The defendant relied on state . .
Appeal from – The United States of America v Nolan CA 4-Feb-2014
The employee was made redundant from working at a US watercraft repair base. She complained that on the base closing the appellant had failed to consult with her as employee representative. The appellant denied that obligation. After a reference to . .
At EAT – United States of America v Nolan EAT 15-May-2009
EAT REDUNDANCY: Collective consultation and information / Protective award
An Employment Tribunal held that the USA was in breach of Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act . .
AT CA (1) – United States of America v Nolan CA 9-Nov-2010
The claimant had sought a protective award under the 1992. She had been a civilian employee at a base operated by the appellant which it closed. She sought to sue as an employee representative, saying that the appellant had failed to consult its . .
At ECJ – United States of America v Nolan ECJ 18-Oct-2012
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 98/59/EC – Protection of workers – Collective redundancies – Scope – Closure of an American military base – Information and consultation of workers – Time at which the consultation obligation arises – . .
Cited – Goodwin v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-Mar-1996
An order for a journalist to reveal his source was a breach of his right of free expression: ‘The court recalls that freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and that the safeguards to be afforded to . .
At CA – United States of America v Nolan CA 24-Nov-2010
. .
Cited – Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA ECJ 13-Nov-1990
Sympathetic construction of national legislation
LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC . .
Cited – Teckal Srl v Comune di Viano, Azienda Gas-Acqua Consorziale (AGAC) di Reggio Emilia ECJ 18-Nov-1999
AGAC was a corporate entity set up by a consortium of Italian local authorities to provide energy and environmental services to those participating. Prior to 1997 Teckal had supplied fuel to Viano and had serviced its heating systems. In May 1997 . .
Cited – HM Revenue and Customs v Vodafone 2 CA 28-Jul-2006
The inspector had sought additional information from the company with respect to its tax returns, believing that the company had not provided sufficient information about the earnings of foreign controlled companies. They now challenged the ability . .
Cited – Brent London Borough Council and Others v Risk Management Partners Ltd SC 9-Feb-2011
The council had put out to tender its insurance requirements. The respondent submitted its bid. The council then withdrew the tender in order to take up membership of a mutual company providing such services created by local authorities in London. . .
Cited – Robertson v Swift SC 9-Sep-2014
Notice Absence did not Remove Right to Cancel
The defendant had contracted to arrange the removal of the claimant’s household goods on moving house. The claimant cancelled the contract, made at his housel, but refused to pay the cancellation fee, saying that the contract not having been made at . .
Cited – Salomon v Customs and Excise Commissioners CA 1966
Diplock LJ said: ‘The Convention is one of those public acts of state of Her Majesty’s Government of which Her Majesty’s judges must take judicial notice if it be relevant to the determination of a case before them, if necessary informing themselves . .
Cited – Regina v Kohn CACD 1979
An overdraft facility was property which could be the subject of a charge of theft. In the context of the presentation of a cheque, improperly presented to a bank but which the bank pays, it was a theft of a chose in action by the person who . .
Cited – Alcom Ltd v Republic of Colombia HL 1984
A bank account used to cover the day-to-day expenses of an Embassy, clearly served sovereign purposes and therefore was immune from enforcement measures. The Act of 1978 must be read against the background of customary international law current in . .
Cited – Oakley Inc v Animal Ltd and others CA 20-Oct-2005
It was argued that the Secretary of State, when implementing the Directive in the 2001 Regulations, had exceeded his powers in preserving provisions of the Registered Designs Act. The judge had held the Seceretary had exceeded his powers. The . .
Cited – Coditel Brabant v Commune d’Uccle, Region de Bruxelles-Capitale (Law Relating To Undertakings) ECJ 13-Nov-2008
ECJ Public procurement – Tendering procedures Public service concessions – Concession for the operation of a municipal cable television network – Awarded by a municipality to an inter-municipal cooperative . .
Cited – Scattolon v Ministero Dell Istruzione, Dell Universita E Della Ricerca ECJ 5-Apr-2011
ECJ (Opinion) Social policy – Directive 77/187/EEC – Safeguarding of employees rights in the event of transfers of undertakings – Transfer of staff of a public entity to another public person – Recognition by the . .
Cited – Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority SC 30-May-2012
The defendant sought to resist his extradition under a European Arrest Warrant to Sweden to face charges of sexual assaults. He said that the prosecutor who sought the extradition was not a judicial authority within the Framework Decision.
Cited – The Case of the SS ‘Lotus’ PCIJ 1927
Jurisdiction is primarily territorial in both international and domestic law: ‘the first and foremost restriction imposed by international law upon a state is that – failing the existence of a permissive rule to the contrary – it may not exercise . .
Cited – F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd v Empagran SA 14-Jun-2004
United States Supreme Court – the Supreme Court reflected on matters of comity in relation to US competition law in the Sherman Act, saying that a state has jurisdiction to prescribe law with respect to ‘(a) conduct that, wholly or in substantial . .
Cited – Mangold v Helm ECJ 22-Nov-2005
ECJ Grand Chamber – Directive 1999/70/EC – Clauses 2, 5 and 8 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work – Directive 2000/78/EC – Article 6 – Equal treatment as regards employment and occupation – Age . .
Cited – Vatsouras v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 900; Koupatantze v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 90 C-23/08 ECJ 12-Mar-2009
ECJ (Opinion) European citizenship Freedom of movement for persons – Concept of worker Validity of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC Resident nationals of other Member States who have become unemployed after . .
Cited – Vatsouras v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 900; Koupatantze v Arbeitsgemeinschaft (ARGE) Nurnberg 90 – C-22/08 ECJ 12-Mar-2009
ECJ (Opinion) European citizenship – Freedom of movement for persons – Concept of worker Validity of Article 24(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC Resident nationals of other Member States who have become unemployed . .
Cited – Kucukdeveci v Swedex GmbH and Co KG ECJ 19-Jan-2010
ECJ Principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age – Directive 2000/78/EC – National legislation on dismissal not taking into account the period of employment completed before the employee reaches the age of . .
Cited – Patmalniece v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 16-Mar-2011
The claimant challenged as incompatible with EU law, the Regulations which restricted the entitlement to state pension credit to those entitled to reside in the UK.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority). The conditions imposed by the Regulations . .
Cited – Association De Mediation Sociale v Union Locale Des Syndicats CGT ECJ 15-Jan-2014
ECJ Social policy – Directive 2002/14/EC – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 27 – Subjecting the setting up of bodies representing staff to certain thresholds of employees – . .
Cited – Benkharbouche and Another v Embassy of The Republic of Sudan CA 5-Feb-2015
The claimant had been an employee of a foreign diplomatic mission. He said that he was not debarred by the 1978 Act from bringing claims for unfair dismissal and breach of working time regulations, saying that any exemption would infringe his human . .
Cited – Commission v United Kingdom (Judgment) ECJ 8-Jun-1994
ECJ Despite the limited character of the harmonization of rules in respect of collective redundancies which Directive 75/129 was intended to bring about, national rules which, by not providing for a system for . .
Cited – Martinez Sala v Freistaat Bayern ECJ 12-May-1998
ECJ A benefit such as the child-raising allowance, which is automatically granted to persons fulfilling certain objective criteria, without any individual and discretionary assessment of personal needs, and which . .
Cited – UK Coal Mining Ltd v National Union of Mineworkers (Northumberland Area) and Another EAT 27-Sep-2007
The employer appealed against a protective award made for failing to consult the union on prospective redundancies.
Held: The appeal failed. The duty to consult arose as soon as the redundancies were fixed as a clear, even if there had been . .
Cited – Cukurova Finance International Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Treasury and Another Admn 29-Sep-2008
The claimant contended that section 2(2)(b) of the the 1972 Act did not confer power on Her Majesty’s Treasury to make the 2003 Regulations and, accordingly, they should be quashed or, alternatively, construed so as to be intra vires. . .
Cited – Bullimore v Pothecary Witham Weld etc EAT 21-Sep-2010
EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION – COMPENSATION
H, a partner in a firm of solicitors, PWW, by whose predecessor C had previously been employed gave an unfavourable reference to another firm, S, with whom she was . .
Cited – ITV Broadcasting Ltd and Others v TV Catchup Ltd PatC 18-Jul-2011
. .

Cited by:

At SC – The United States of America v Nolan CA 4-Feb-2014
The employee was made redundant from working at a US watercraft repair base. She complained that on the base closing the appellant had failed to consult with her as employee representative. The appellant denied that obligation. After a reference to . .
At SC – United States of America v Nolan ECJ 22-Mar-2012
ECJ (Opinion) Directive 98/59/EC – Admissibility – Protection of workers – Collective redundancies – Information and consultation of workers – Closure of a US military base – Scope – Time at which the obligation . .
Cited – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau SC 3-Aug-2016
The claimant had been severely injured when hit by a car in Greece. The car’s driver was uninsured. The Court was now asked whether the scope of her claim to damages was to be determined in accordance with English or Greek law. The implementation of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, European, International

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.553630

Michalak v University of Leeds Department of NHS Postgraduate Mental and Dental Education: EAT 16 Nov 2009

EAT PRACTICE and PROCEDURE
Costs
Appellate jurisdiction / reasons / Burns-Barke
An award of costs against a Claimant whose claims were struck out was set aside as the Employment Tribunal did not make express findings linking her conduct to any provision in Rule 40, failing also to comply with Rule 30.

Judges:

McMullen QC

Citations:

[2009] UKEAT 0319 – 09 – 1611

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.392533

Tarmac Roadstone Holdings Ltd v Peacock: CA 1973

Overtime hours are not part of normal working hours when calculating redundancy payments unless they are obligatory on both sides, that is, contractually guaranteed by the employer and compulsory for the employee.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘First, where there is a fixed number of compulsory working hours, and thereafter overtime is voluntary on both sides – so that the employer is not bound to employ the man for any overtime and the employee is not bound to serve it – then, although the overtime is worked regularly each week, nevertheless, being voluntary, it does not count as part of the normal working hours. Such a situation is covered by paragraph 1(1).
Second, when there is a fixed number of compulsory working hours and in addition a fixed period of overtime which is obligatory on both sides – so that the employer is bound to provide that overtime and the employee bound to serve it – then that fixed period of overtime is added to the fixed period of compulsory working hours so that the total number counts as the normal working hours. Such a situation is covered by paragraph 1(2). In short, ‘guaranteed overtime’ counts as part of normal working hours.Third, where there is a fixed number of compulsory working hours, and overtime is obligatory on the man if asked but not on the employer – so that the employer is entitled to call on the man to work overtime but is not bound to call upon him to do so, then the overtime does not come within the normal working hours. Such a case seems to me to come within paragraph 1(1). It comes within the words ‘the employee is entitled to overtime pay when employed for more than a fixed number of hours in a week…’ It does not come within the words of paragraph 1(2), because the contract of employment does not ‘fix’ the number of hours of employment. The overtime is not fixed but is at the option of the employer.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1973] ICR 273

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – British Airways Plc v Williams and Others SC 24-Mar-2010
The court was asked as to the calculation of annual leave pay for crew members in civil aviation under the Regulations. The company argued that it was based on the fixed annual remuneration, and the pilots argued that it should include other . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.406181

Miller v Hamworthy Engineering Ltd: CA 1986

Citations:

[1986] ICR 846

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Lindsey Beveridge v KLM UK Ltd EAT 16-Feb-2000
EAT The claimant appealed refusal of her claim for unlawful deduction. She had been off sick long term. Her doctor certified her fit to return, and she asked to return, but her employer waited a further six weeks . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.374257

Wilcock v Stockton-On-Tees Borough Council: EAT 17 May 2000

The claimant appealed from rejection of her claim that she was indirectly discriminated against by her Respondent employer, by the imposition of a requirement or condition which prevented her accepting the post of Senior Youth Arts Officer, and that as a consequence she was made redundant from her employment and that her dismissal was unfair. The problem for the Appellant was carrying out evening work, because of her own young children, when the Respondent required evening work from those youth and community workers like the Appellant, whose task it was particularly to assist at youth clubs, which open in the evenings.

Citations:

[2000] UKEAT 205 – 00 – 1705

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.265166

Spence v Intype Libra Ltd: EAT 27 Apr 2007

EAT The appellant who was disabled was dismissed after a long absence from work. He made various claims under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, all of which were rejected. He contended that the failure to make an assessment of a disabled employee was a failure to make a reasonable adjustment and that Tarbuck v Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd [2006] IRLR 664 was wrongly decided, alternatively ought to be distinguished on the facts. The EAT followed Tarbuck and held that it could not be distinguished.
The employers cross appealed on the grounds that the Employment Tribunal had erred in law in the way that it determined whether or not the employee was disabled. The EAT held that the Tribunal’s approach did betray an error but that their findings of fact led to the inevitable conclusion that the employee was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act at the material time, which in the context of the appeal was the date of dismissal.
The court considered the effect of an improvement of a claimant’s condition when considering a disability discrimination claim. Elias J said: ‘We recognise that in practice it may be difficult for a tribunal to disregard evidence which shows how the medical position did in fact progress. But it is important that they should do so. Logically, subsequent events cannot be material. If an employer dismisses someone who has a disability likely to last 12 months it cannot alter the position if the employee shortly thereafter makes an unexpected recovery before the 12 months has elapsed; similarly, an employee who was not disabled when the alleged unlawful conduct occurred cannot retrospectively be found to have been disabled at that time because he takes an unexpected turn for the worse. If, contrary to our view, subsequent evidence has any materiality at all, it can only be to confirm or reinforce a conclusion about disability which the tribunal has already reached by relying on the evidence which would have been available at the relevant date.’ and ‘The issue . . is whether the necessary reasonable adjustment has been made; whether it is by luck or judgment is immaterial.’

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Elias (President)

Citations:

[2007] UKEAT 0617 – 06 – 2704, UKEAT/0617/06

Links:

Bailii, EAT

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Mid-Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust v Cambridge EAT 4-Mar-2003
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 . .

Cited by:

Cited – Richmond Adult Community College v McDougall CA 17-Jan-2008
The claimant had been offered and had accepted a job subject to satisfactory health clearance. When that was not received her offer was withdrawn. She had suffered a condition which would affect her daily activities, but had recovered from that . .
Cited – Matuszowicz v Kingston Upon Hull City Council CA 10-Feb-2009
The appellant was employed as a teacher. He became disabled on losing part of his arm. He had been located at a prison and was unable to manage the heavy doors. He complained that the respondent had not made reasonable adjustments by transferring . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.251592

Rega v Ridge Crest Cleaning Service: EAT 21 May 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1286 – 96 – 2105

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206410

Anya v University of Oxford and Another: EAT 1 Oct 1998

Preliminary hearing

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 739 – 98 – 0110

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Anya v University of Oxford and Another EAT 17-Dec-1999
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Anya v University of Oxford and Another EAT 17-Dec-1999
. .
See Also – Dr Anya v University of Oxford and Another CA 22-Mar-2001
Discrimination – History of interactions relevant
When a tribunal considered whether the motive for an act was discriminatory, it should look not just at the act, but should make allowance for earlier acts which might throw more light on the act in question. The Tribunal should assess the totality . .
See Also – Dr C C Anya v University of Oxford Dr S G Roberts EAT 4-Feb-2003
EAT Race Discrimination – Inferring discrimination . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206712

O’Shea Construction Ltd v Bassi: EAT 21 May 1998

Judges:

Lindsay J

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1366 – 97 – 2105, [1998] ICR 1130

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Bassi v O’Shea Construction Ltd EAT 3-Feb-1999
. .
Cited – SCA Packaging Ltd v Boyle (Northern Ireland) HL 1-Jul-2009
The claimant suffered a condition which would lead to the development of vocal nodules unless she followed a program which would allow her to avoid raising her voice. She said that employer should not have placed her within a noisy environment. The . .
Cited – SCA Packaging Ltd v Boyle (Northern Ireland) HL 1-Jul-2009
The claimant suffered a condition which would lead to the development of vocal nodules unless she followed a program which would allow her to avoid raising her voice. She said that employer should not have placed her within a noisy environment. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206405

Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospitals and others: EAT 1 May 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1111 – 97 – 0105

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust and others EAT 16-Jul-1997
. .
See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospitals and others EAT 27-Feb-1998
. .
Cited – Walker v Northumberland County Council QBD 16-Nov-1994
The plaintiff was a manager within the social services department. He suffered a mental breakdown in 1986, and had four months off work. His employers had refused to provide the increased support he requested. He had returned to work, but again, did . .

Cited by:

See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust and others EAT 23-Jul-1999
. .
See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospitals and others CA 10-Jul-2001
. .
See Also – Mensah v West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust and Another EAT 18-Jun-2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206396

Network Communications Systems Ltd v Hill: EAT 1 May 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 420 – 98 – 0105

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206402

Khor v Caerphilly County Council and others: EAT 12 May 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 940 – 97 – 1205

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206389

Lambert v Croydon College: EAT 13 May 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 1247 – 96 – 1305

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Lambert v Croydon College EAT 19-Nov-1998
Crank was rightly decided, notwithstanding a fresh argument that it offended against section 203 by in effect sanctioning contracting out of the Act. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Lambert v Croydon College EAT 19-Nov-1998
Crank was rightly decided, notwithstanding a fresh argument that it offended against section 203 by in effect sanctioning contracting out of the Act. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206391

Nwokenagu v Midland Nursing Home and others: EAT 1 May 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 364 – 98 – 0105

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206404

Jones v Post Office: EAT 1 May 1998

Judges:

Morison P J

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 404 – 98 – 0105

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Post Office v Jones CA 5-Jun-2001
The employee had become diabetic. Upon his coming to require insulin, the employer undertook a new risk assessment, and restricted his duties as a driver. He claimed disability discrimination. At the tribunal, both employer and employee brought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206388

Ilangaratne v British Medical Association: EAT 1 May 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 508 – 98 – 0105

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Ilangaratne v British Medical Association EAT 11-May-1999
. .
See Also – Ilangaratne v British Medical Association EAT 29-Sep-1999
. .
See Also – Ilangaratne v British Medical Association and Another EAT 29-Mar-2001
. .
See Also – Ilangaratne v British Medical Association and others EAT 29-May-2002
. .
See Also – Dr J B Ilangaratne v British Medical Association Dr Richard Smith EAT 24-Mar-2003
EAT Race Discrimination – Direct . .
See Also – Ilangaratne v British Medical Association ChD 4-Oct-2005
. .
see also – Ilangaratne v British Medical Association ChD 9-May-2007
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.206386

Harrold v Wiltshire Healthcare NHS Trust: EAT 6 Apr 1998

Citations:

[1998] UKEAT 236 – 98 – 0604

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

See Also – Harold v Wiltshire Health Care NHS Trust EAT 1-Oct-1998
. .
See Also – Harrold v Wiltshire Healthcare NHS Trust EAT 1-Mar-1999
. .
Cited – Meikle v Nottinghamshire County Council EAT 19-Aug-2003
EAT Disability Discrimination – Less favourable treatment. The appellant brought proceedings against the Respondents alleging that they had failed to make adjustments to her workplace and conditions so as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.206329