Category: Employment

Henry v London Borough of Newham: EAT 13 May 2003

EAT Race Discrimination – Indirect.

Judges:

His Hon Judge Birtles QC

Citations:

[2003] EAT 0991 – 02 – 2907, EAT/991/02

Links:

Bailii, EATn

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Henry v London Borough of Newham EAT 6-Dec-2002
. .
Cited – Owusu v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority EAT 1-Mar-1995
The employee complained of his employer’s repeated failure to regrade him, and alleged discrimination. The employer said his claim was out of time.
Held: Mummery J made the distinction between single acts of discrimination, and continuing . .

Cited by:

See Also – Henry v London Borough of Newham EAT 29-Jul-2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187233

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 accommodate her disability, that they had treated her less favourably for reasons relating to her disability; and in the second case presented in 2000 that they had constructively dismissed her.
EAT Disability Discrimination – Less favourable treatment.

Judges:

His Hon Judge Ansell

Citations:

EAT/0033/03, [2003] EAT 0033 – 03 – 2609, [2003] UKEAT 0033 – 03 – 2609

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EAT

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995 4(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Meikle v Nottingham City Council EAT 14-Apr-1994
The appellant challenged dismissal of her claim for indirect racial discrimination based on two grounds. First, that the Tribunal’s decision was perverse; in other words that it was a decision which, on the evidence before it, no reasonable tribunal . .
Cited – Western Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp CA 1978
To succeed in a claim for constructive dismissal the plaintiff must establish a breach of contract by the defendant, that the breach was sufficiently serious to have justified the claimant resigning, or at least be the last in a series of events . .
Cited – Gogay v Hertfordshire County Council CA 26-Jul-2000
The employee sought damages for breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, even though she remained throughout the employment of the Council against whom she was bringing proceedings.
Held: Her remaining in employment was a factor . .
Cited – Bliss v South East Thames Regional Health Authority CA 1985
General damages cannot be awarded for frustration, mental distress or injured feelings arising from an employer’s breach of the implied term of confidence and trust. Dillon LJ said that damages for mental distress in contract are limited to certain . .
Cited – Lewis v Motorworld Garages Ltd CA 1985
The court considered the circumstances under which an employee might resign and successfully claim constructive dismissal.
Glidewell LJ said: ‘This breach of this implied obligation of trust and confidence may consist of a series of action on . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Harley EAT 19-Feb-2001
Appeal against a finding that a claim of disability discrimination was in time. . .
Cited – Catherall v Michelin Tyre Plc EAT 21-Oct-2002
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability. . .
Cited – Sutcliffe v Hawker Siddley Aviation Limited NIRC 1973
Though the 1971 Act made no reference to it, nonetheless there could be an unfair dismissal deriving from a constructive dismissal. An argument that the converse interpretation should be adopted because earlier legislation (the 1965 Act) had defined . .
Cited – M H Marshall v Southampton And South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) ECJ 26-Feb-1986
ECJ The court considered the measure of compensation in a successful claim for sex discrimination arising from the health authority’s provision of an earlier compulsory retirement age for women compared with that . .
Cited – Harrold v Wiltshire Healthcare NHS Trust EAT 6-Apr-1998
. .
Cited – Derby Specialist Fabrication Ltd v J N Burton EAT 27-Sep-2000
Race Discrimination – Direct. After dealing with the arguments based on the history of the various statutes: ‘Whether the employer deliberately dismisses the employee on racial grounds or he so acts as to repudiate the contract by racially . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Nottinghamshire County Council v Meikle CA 8-Jul-2004
The claimant was a teacher who had come to suffer a sight disability. She complained that her employers had failed to make reasonable accomodation for her disability, and subsequently she resigned claiming constructive dismissal and damages for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.186795

The University of Huddersfield v Dr P R Wolff: EAT 16 Jul 2003

EAT Sex Discrimination – Burden of proof

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P)

Citations:

EAT/596/02, [2003] EAT 0596 – 02 – 1607, [2003] UKEAT 0596 – 02 – 1607

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EATn

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.186385

Kingston Upon Hull City Council v Dunnachie: EAT 23 Jun 2003

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissal.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P)

Citations:

EAT/706/02, [2003] EAT 0706 – 02 – 2306, [2003] UKEAT 0706 – 02 – 2306

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EAT

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council; Williams v Southampton Institute; Dawson v Stonham Housing Association EAT 8-Apr-2003
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation
In each case, The employee sought additional damages for non-economic loss after an unfair dismissal.
Held: The Act could be compared with the Discrimination Acts . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council CA 11-Feb-2004
Compensation for non-economic loss brought about by the manner of an unfair dismissal is, on authority and on principle, recoverable. The award of such compensation by the employment tribunal in the present case was not excessive and was adequately . .
See Also – Kingston Upon Hull City Council v Dunnachie; HSBC Bank Plc v Drage EAT 7-Jul-2003
EAT Practice and Procedure – Costs
EAT Practice and Procedure – Costs. . .
See Also – Dunnachie v Kingston-upon-Hull City Council HL 15-Jul-2004
The claimant sought damages following his dismissal to include a sum to reflect the manner of his dismissal and the distress caused.
Held: The remarks of Lord Hoffmann in Johnson -v- Unysis were obiter. The court could not, under the section, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.186495

Sian v Abbey National Plc: EAT 25 Jun 2003

EAT Practice and Procedure – Time for appealing

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P)

Citations:

PA/207/03, [2003] EAT 0207 – 03 – 2506, [2003] UKEAT 0207 – 03 – 2506, [2004] ICR 55, [2004] IRLR 185

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EATn

Citing:

Cited – Mock v Inland Revenue EAT 1-Mar-1999
In the context of the time for appealing to the EAT under Rule 3(3) EAT Rules 1993, as amended, ‘sent’ referred to the date appearing on the ET ‘decision’.
Morison P said: ‘Industrial Tribunal chairmen are required to produce reasons. When . .

Cited by:

Applied – Gdynia American Shipping Lines (London) Ltd v Chelminski CA 8-Jul-2004
The employers had sought to appeal from a decision of the employment tribunal. The EAT had refused it as out of time.
Held: The rules required the appellant to file within 42 days of receiving the decision, the notice of appeal together with a . .
Cited – Tamina v NHS Professionals EAT 18-Nov-2010
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Time for appealing
The Appellant was one and 16 days late in lodging a Notice of Appeal against two interim case management orders. He was articulate and assiduous in legal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.186388

S J Chinyanga v Buffer Bear Limited: EAT 8 May 2003

EAT Race Discrimination – Indirect

Judges:

His Hon Judge McMullen QC

Citations:

EAT/300/02, [2003] EAT 0300 – 02 – 0805, [2003] UKEAT 0300 – 02 – 0805

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EATn

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.185937

Securiplan v Bademosi: EAT 9 May 2003

EAT Trade Union Rights – Dismissal – application of the TUPE Regulations where the transferor and the employee did not intend the contract of employment to be transferred.

Judges:

His Hon Judge McMullen QC

Citations:

EAT/1128/02, [2003] EAT 1128 – 02 – 0905, [2003] UKEAT 1128 – 02 – 0905

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EAT

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.185935

Susie Radin Limited v GMB and others: EAT 24 Jun 2003

EAT Redundancy – Protective award

Judges:

His Hon Judge D M Levy QC

Citations:

EAT/712/02, [2003] EAT 0712 – 02 – 2406, [2003] UKEAT 0712 – 02 – 2406

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EATn

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Susie Radin Ltd v GMB and others CA 20-Feb-2004
The company made redundancies but failed to carry out any effective or honest consultation. The tribunal awarded the maximum 90 days protective order. The company appealed saying that it had given the employees greater notice than was strictly due. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.185783

Kopel v Safeway Stores Plc: EAT 11 Apr 2003

EAT The Tribunal had concluded that the claimant’s refusal of an employer’s offer amounted to unreasonable conduct.
Held: Mittig J said: ‘The Employment Appeal Tribunal had not erred in exercising its discretion under Rule 14(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure and making a Costs Order against the applicant on the grounds that part of her claim was seriously misconceived and that her failure to accept the employer’s substantial offer of settlement was unreasonable conduct of the proceedings.’
As to the use of Calderbank offers in employment law proceedings: ‘There is no question of any rule in Calderbank v Calderbank applying to proceedings before the employment tribunal. The principle in Calderbank is that a party to matrimonial proceedings against whom a money claim is made can protect his position as to costs by making an offer of settlement marked without prejudice save as to costs. The offer may not be referred to during the main hearing but may be once judgment is given: if the order made is less favourable than the offer, the court may take the offer into account when considering what if any order for costs to make.’ and ‘There is no doubt, however, that an offer of the Calderbank type is a factor which the employment tribunal can take into account under rule 14.’

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Mitting

Citations:

EAT/281/02, [2003] EAT 0281 – 02 – 1104, [2003] UKEAT 0281 – 02 – 1104, [2003] IRLR 753

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EATn

Cited by:

Cited – Raggett v John Lewis Plc EAT 17-Aug-2012
raggett_lewisEAT2012
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs
In determining the amount of costs to be awarded having decided that the bringing of an unfair dismissal claim was misconceived and that a costs order should be made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Costs

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185496

Mitchell and others v Amersham and Wycombe College: EAT 31 Mar 2003

EAT Working Time Regulations – An appeal by Ms Mitchell, Ms Lynn and Mr Nagulendran, part-time lecturers employed by the Respondent College, against a decision of the London (Central) Employment Tribunal promulgated with extended reasons on 22 March 2002, dismissing their complaints of failure to pay holiday pay contrary to the Working Time Regulations 1998 (the Regulations).

Judges:

His Honour Judge Peter Clark

Citations:

EAT/483/02, [2003] EAT 0483 – 02 – 3103, [2003] UKEAT 0483 – 02 – 3103

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EAT

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Telephone Information Services v Wilkinson EAT 1991
The employee was dismissed. His employers offered to pay to him andpound;9,699, the maximum sum he could have been awarded if the matter went to the tribunal, but made no admission of liability. He rejected the offer, saying that he wanted the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185505

L A Preedy v HMO Giddy T/A Easterhill Furniture: EAT 15 May 2003

EAT Practice and Procedure – Postponement

Judges:

His Hon Judge Mcmullen QC

Citations:

EAT/287/03, [2003] EAT 0287 – 03 – 1505, [2003] UKEAT 0287 – 03 – 1505

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – L A Preedy v J Smith T/A Easterhill Furniture H N Giddy EAT 26-Apr-2002
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal . .

Cited by:

See Also – L A Preedy v J Smith T/A Easterhill Furniture H N Giddy EAT 26-Apr-2002
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185478

Stanley Cole (Wainfleet) Ltd v Sheridan: CA 25 Jul 2003

The employment tribunal, in delivering its judgment had cited a decision which was not among those referred to by the parties, but it did not give an opportunity to them to comment on it before delivering its decision.
Held: Such an ommission was a defect in procedure, and potentially a serious one. However in this case, it was not shown that the case referred to had had any significant impact on the decision, and therefore the original decision stood. The right to a fair hearing requires notice of all material matters of fact and law to be given to the parties. A mere procedural failure will not normally allow a review. Each such case must stand on its own facts.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Buxton And Lord Justice Mance

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1046, Times 05-Sep-2003, Gazette 02-Oct-2003, [2003] 4 All ER 1181, [2003] IRLR 885, [2003] ICR 1449

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2001 Sch1-13(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Albion Hotel (Freshwater) Ltd v M Maia E Silva, L A Maia E Silva EAT 15-Nov-2001
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Reason for Dismissal
A hotel had failed to pay a bonus to certain staff. This had been found to be an unlawful deduction from wages, and therefore an infringement of a protected right, . .
Cited – Lindsay v Ironsides Ray and Vials EAT 27-Jan-1994
The industrial tribunal had refused the applicant an extension of time.
Held: The Tribunal mistook the law in holding that it could grant a review of its decision because the employee’s case had not been properly argued at the preliminary . .
Cited – General Council of British Shipping v Deria and Others 1985
Where an Industrial Tribunal’s decision could not be reviewed because under the rules, the new evidence had been available, a review based on the new evidence should only be granted where there existed some mitigation causing the failure to bring . .
See Also – Stanley Cole (Wainfleet) Ltd v Sheridan EAT 13-Nov-2001
. .
Appeal from – Stanley (Wainfleet ) Ltd v J F Sheridan EAT 18-Jul-2002
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Employment, Natural Justice

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185306

McPherson v BNP Paribas Branch: EAT 28 May 2003

EAT Practice and Procedure – Application/Claim.

Judges:

His Hon Judge Birtles

Citations:

EAT/916/02, [2003] EAT 0916 – 02 – 1407, [2003] UKEAT 0916 – 02 – 1407

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EAT

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – McPherson v BNP Paribas SA (London Branch) CA 14-May-2004
The claimant withdrew his claim in the Employment Tribunal. By then, his employer had incurred very substantial legal costs. He appealed against the order for costs against him.
Held: The tribunal had wrongly asked whether the withdrawal of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185288

Frewin v Consignia Plc: EAT 9 Jun 2003

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Reason for dismissal including substantial other reason.

Judges:

His Honour Judge Reid QC

Citations:

EAT/0981/02, [2003] EAT 0981 – 02 – 1807, [2003] UKEAT 0981 – 02 – 1807

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EATn

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – McAdie v Royal Bank of Scotland CA 31-Jul-2007
The claimant succeeded in her claim for unfair dismissal, but now appealed against the reversal of the decision by the EAT. She had been dismissed for incapability to which she had contributed by her conduct. She had refused a move to another bank . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185283

Birch and Humber v The University of Liverpool: CA 1985

Termination of employment by mutual consent in such a way as not to involve a dismissal is not a statutory redundancy. Ackner LJ said: ‘I put to her the simple example of an employer who envisages some time in the future, eg because of new technology, the need to slim down his workforce and makes an offer to those who are prepared to resign rather than wait to volunteer for redundancy and supports that offer with a financial inducement which is far in excess of what is likely to be obtained under the redundancy legislation. It seems to me clear that in such a situation, assuming no coercion of any kind, that if that offer is accepted there can be no question of there having been a dismissal.’

Judges:

Ackner LJ

Citations:

(1985) IRLR 87, [1985] ICR 470, [1985] EWCA Civ 8

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – AGCO Limited v Massey Ferguson Works Pension Trust Limited, Bradbury, Chater CA 17-Jul-2003
An employee sought payment under his pension scheme on taking redundancy at the employer’s request. The scheme did not make explicit provision for payment in such circumstances.
Held: The court had to begin with the words used. The kernel of . .
Cited – Sandhu v Jan De Rijk Transport Ltd CA 10-May-2007
The court was asked whether the claimant had been dismissed or had resigned. He had attended a meeting to be told that his contract was to be finished. The company later complained that he had resigned when they were unable to reach a compromise on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185197

Photocorporation (UK) Ltd v Truelove: EAT 11 Apr 2003

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Procedural fairness. The tribunal was asked as to the alleged constructive unfair dismissal of a senior manager whose partner leaves and subsequently joins the competition, creating genuine fears in the mind of the Respondent about the leakage of sensitive information.

Judges:

His Honour Judge J Mcmullen QC

Citations:

0080/03, [2003] EAT 0080 – 03 – 1104, [2003] UKEAT 0080 – 03 – 1104

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Photo Corporation (UK) Ltd v Truelove EAT 20-Apr-2004
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation – Polkey deduction – decision on remission – whether Meek-compliant – whether ET assessment unsustainable on facts found. . .

Cited by:

See Also – Photo Corporation (UK) Ltd v Truelove EAT 20-Apr-2004
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation – Polkey deduction – decision on remission – whether Meek-compliant – whether ET assessment unsustainable on facts found. . .
See Also – Photocorporation (Uk) Ltd v Truelove EAT 11-Dec-2003
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissal. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185266

C Foster v Somerset County Council: EAT 28 Jul 2003

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Reason for dismissal

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Elias

Citations:

EAT/355/03, [2003] EAT 0355 – 03 – 3107, [2003] UKEAT 0355 – 03 – 3107

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Application for leave – Foster v Somerset County Council EAT 8-May-2003
leave to appeal . .
Appealed to – Foster v Somerset County Council CA 13-Feb-2004
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Foster v Somerset County Council CA 13-Feb-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185267

Saad v Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust: EAT 22 Aug 2018

VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Other forms of victimisation
Victimisation – section 27(3) Equality Act 2010
In 2011, when facing the likelihood that he would fail the assessment required to qualify as a Consultant Cardiothoracic Surgeon, the Claimant raised a grievance regarding a (race) discriminatory remark alleged to have been made some four years previously. Although the ET held there were no reasonable grounds for his believing the allegation to be true (relevant to the Claimant’s protected disclosure claim), it accepted that he had subjectively believed that it was. In raising this matter as a grievance, however, the ET found that the Claimant had intended this would mean the assessment – which he knew would go badly for him – would be postponed. This, the ET concluded, meant he had not raised the allegation in good faith, as was then a requirement for the purposes of a protected disclosure claim. The ET duly dismissed the Claimant’s whistleblowing complaints in this regard. Turning to the complaint of victimisation, in which the Claimant relied on the same allegation as a protected act for the purposes of section 27 Equality Act 2010, the ET concluded that its earlier findings in respect of the protected disclosure claim also meant the victimisation claim failed. Specifically, it was fatal that it had found that the Claimant’s belief was unreasonable and that he had an ulterior motive, which meant he had not made the allegation in good faith. Those findings, the ET ruled, meant that the Claimant had acted in bad faith for the purposes of subsection 27(3) EqA.
The Claimant appealed, arguing the ET had erred in reading across from its findings in respect of the protected disclosure claim when determining the complaint of victimisation. Moreover, as the ET had found he had subjectively believed the truth of the allegation, it was not made in bad faith, regardless whether he had an ulterior motive.
Held: allowing the appeal
The ET had erred in law in reading across from its finding of absence of good faith for the purposes of the Claimant’s protected disclosure claim to its determination of bad faith under section 27(3) EqA. The two statutory contexts were different and the ET had failed to engage with the specific questions raised by subsection 27(3) EqA. It had made no express finding as to whether the allegation was false (although that was probably implicit) and, more significantly, it had failed to tackle the specific question raised by the bad faith requirement under subsection 27(3) which, absent other context, had a core meaning of dishonesty (observations of Auld LJ at paragraph 41 Street v Derbyshire Unemployed Workers’ Centre [2005] ICR 97 CA, applied). Motivation could be part of the relevant context but, in determining bad faith for the purposes of subsection 27(3) EqA, the primary focus was the question of the employee’s honesty.
Although the assessment of bad faith was for the ET, in the present case the finding that the Claimant subjectively believed the allegation to be true was sufficient to counter the suggestion that he had acted in bad faith. On the ET’s other findings, that meant the claim of victimisation in this regard must be upheld.

Citations:

[2018] UKEAT 0276 – 17 – 2208

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.625452

AGCO Limited v Massey Ferguson Works Pension Trust Limited, Bradbury, Chater: CA 17 Jul 2003

An employee sought payment under his pension scheme on taking redundancy at the employer’s request. The scheme did not make explicit provision for payment in such circumstances.
Held: The court had to begin with the words used. The kernel of retirement is the cessation of work. An employee is entitled to a normal retirement pension at the normal retirement date and that the basic rule is that if he leaves service early then he is still entitled to that pension at that time. One comes back, therefore, to the fact that a normal retirement pension is measured against retirement in the ordinary way at the retirement age. Save for the possibility of exceptional cases where the use of the expression is in truth a misuse of language, the case of voluntary redundancy fits better in the latter camp of a retirement at the request of the employer.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Aldous Lord Justice Sedley And Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1044, Times 24-Jul-2003, Gazette 18-Sep-2003, [2003] OPLR 199, [2003] IRLR 783, [2003] Pens LR 241, [2004] ICR 15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Birch and Humber v The University of Liverpool CA 1985
Termination of employment by mutual consent in such a way as not to involve a dismissal is not a statutory redundancy. Ackner LJ said: ‘I put to her the simple example of an employer who envisages some time in the future, eg because of new . .
Cited – Young v Associated Newspapers 1971
Three journalists were dismissed on notice in circumstances where the redundancy provisions of their contract applied. Those provisions stated that the journalists should receive ‘any entitlement under the pension scheme’. That scheme provided that . .
Cited – Dorrell v May and Baker Ltd 1991
The employee took early retirement due to incapacity. He was dismissed. The question was whether he was entitled to a pension under the incapacity clause which spoke of a member who ‘retires on account of incapacity’, in which case he got an . .
Cited – Brooks v National Westminster Bank Ltd CA 8-Nov-1983
An employee was dismissed for incapacity. The rule provided: ‘Upon retirement . . due to incapacity arising from ill-health’ Para 21 had also been premised ‘Upon retirement’, viz at, after or within ten years of the normal retirement date. Other . .
Cited – Harris v Lord Shuttleworth and Others (Trustee of National and Provincial Building Society Pension Fund) CA 26-Nov-1993
The employee was dismissed on notice. The employee applied to the trustees to be recognised as entitled to an immediate pension as having been permanently incapacitated, but her application was turned down, both on the ground that she could obtain . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Financial Services

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184888

J M Stansbury v Datapulse Plc Troy Holding International Plc: EAT 8 May 2003

EAT Practice and Procedure – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Wall

Citations:

EAT/1255/01, [2003] UKEAT 1255 – 01 – 0805

Links:

Bailii, EAT

Citing:

See Also – Stansbury v Datapulse Plc and Another EAT 13-Sep-2002
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Stansbury v Datapulse Plc and Another CA 15-Dec-2003
In the course of a hearing in the Employment Tribunal, it appeared to one party that a member of the tribunal was drunk and fell asleep.
Held: Two questions arose. First whether that tribunal should deal with a complaint about a member of the . .
Cited – Fordyce v Hammersmith and Fulham Conservative Association EAT 13-Jan-2006
EAT Practice and Procedure – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity. One of the lay members appeared to be asleep. Parties raised the issue with Tribunal and then agreed to continue the hearing. The lay . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184353

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 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 which the employer does not know what it ought to do to ameliorate that disadvantage without making enquiries. To say that a failure to make those enquiries would not amount to a breach of the duty imposed on employers by section 6(1) would render section 6(1) practicably unworkable in many cases.’ The Trust was in breach of the duty imposed on it by section 6(1).
The claimant appealed rejection of her claim for having been victimised for her disability, and the compensation awarded. Workmen were provided with dust masks as they demolished a nearby wall at work, but she had not been. She became unfit for full time work. Unsuccessful attempts were made to ease her back into work. The Trust’s officers had not considered whether she was to be considered disabled, and she was told to return to work or be dismissed. The Trust claimed that the Tribunal had put an improper gloss on the statute.
Held: The appeal failed. The attempted phased return to work did not mean that an assessment was not required. As to the need to make enquiries ‘A proper assessment of what is required to eliminate the disabled person’s disadvantage is therefore a necessary part of the duty imposed by section 6(1) since that duty cannot be complied with unless the employer makes a proper assessment of what needs to be done.’ The tribunal properly decided that: ‘her compensation will have to be discounted to reflect the possibility that an assessment might have established that no steps could reasonably have been taken to ameliorate her disadvantage.’

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Keith

Citations:

EAT/755/02, [2003] EAT 0755 – 02 – 1403, [2003] UKEAT 0755 – 02 – 1403, [2003] IRLR 566

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EATn

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995, Sex Discrimination Act 1975

Citing:

Cited – Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold) CA 25-Mar-1999
The applicant had soft tissue injuries around the spine as a consequence of a back injury at work. He was absent from work for a long time as a result of his injuries, and he was eventually dismissed when his medical advisers could provide no clear . .

Cited by:

Cited – Hay v Surrey County Council CA 16-Feb-2007
The claimant had been employed driving a mobile library. She came to suffer back problems, and was dismissed when the respondent said that she could not work within a library without the ability to lift, after she turned down a move to a different . .
Cited – Project Management Institute v Latif EAT 10-May-2007
EAT The Appellant is a qualifying body, subject to section 14 of the Disability Discrimination Act. The Tribunal found that it had failed to make a reasonable adjustment in the arrangements it made for sitting an . .
Cited – London Borough of Camden v Price-Job EAT 18-Dec-2007
EAT Disability discrimination – Reasonable adjustments/Justification
1. The employers appealed against two findings by the Tribunal that they had failed to make reasonable adjustments for her disability and . .
Distinguished – Bruce v Chamberlain, Addleshaw Goddard and Co CA 29-Jul-2004
. .
Cited – Mitchell v Seagate Technology Ireland NIIT 22-Sep-2008
. .
Cited – Morrison v Key Housing Association EAT 23-Aug-2004
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability . .
Cited – Wheeler v Sungard Sherwood Systems Group Ltd EAT 18-Oct-2004
EAT Disability Discrimination – Justification . .
Cited – T, Regina (on the Application of) v OL Primary School and Another Admn 18-Apr-2005
. .
Cited – Tarbuck v Sainsbury’s Supermarkets EAT 8-Jun-2006
EAT The appellant was disabled. She was found to have been unfairly dismissed and the subject of three acts of disability discrimination. One of these was an alleged failure to consult which was treated as a . .
Cited – Metrobus Ltd v Cook EAT 9-Jan-2007
EAT Disability Discrimination – reasonable adjustments
Practice and Procedure – 2002 Act and pre-action requirements
On the Claimant’s concession that the Employment Tribunal, not having being shown . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – HM Prison Service v Johnson EAT 6-Aug-2007
EAT Disability Discrimination – Less Favourable Treatment / Reasonable Adjustments / Justification
The Claimant was a prison psychologist who developed a depressive illness amounting to a disability within . .
Not preferred – Rider v Leeds City Council EAT 27-Nov-2012
rider_leedsEAT2012
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
The Claimant worked for the Respondent as a Nursery Officer at Armley Moor Children Centre. She raised grievances against colleagues and she was seconded to another post away . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184371

X v Y: EAT 11 Jun 2003

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Reason for dismissal

Judges:

His Hon Judge Clark

Citations:

EAT/765/02, [2003] EAT 0765 – 02 – 1106, [2003] UKEAT 0765 – 02 – 1106

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Pay v Lancashire Probation Service EAT 29-Oct-2003
The appellant challenged refusal of his claim for unfair dismissal. A probation officer, he had business interests in fire breathing and bondage merchandising which the service said were incompatible with his duties, and dismissed him. He complained . .
Appeal from – X v Y (Employment: Sex Offender) CA 28-May-2004
The claimant had been dismissed after it was discovered he had been cautioned for a public homosexual act. He appealed dismissal of his claim saying that the standard of fairness applied was inappropriate with regard to the Human Rights Act, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183585

Nagarajan v Agnew: EAT 21 Jul 1993

Mr Nagarajan, of Indian birth, had brought several complaints to the Tribunal based on race. A settlement was reached on or about 1st November 1989 in full and final settlement of all his claims arising out of his employment with London Underground Ltd. His employment by LUL had ceased by then. Mr Nagarajan, after a spell of unemployment, applied for a job with LUL’s holding company, LRT. Mr Agnew, a manager, on being asked to fill in a form about that application, firmly recommended against Mr Nagarajan’s re-employment. LRT rejected the job application. The company now appealed against a finding of discrimination victimisatio.
Held: The appeal succeeded. There has to be a ‘subsisting employment relationship’ at the time when the events complained of in section 4(2) of the Act occur. The majority of the events listed in that subsection can occur only during employment, the whole provision is couched in the present tense, and had Parliament intended to include post-employment benefits, it would have made that intention explicit. The claimant being no longer employed, the decision was fundamentally flawed.
Where there are mixed motives for the action complained of, the unlawful motive must be of sufficient weight in the decision making process to be treated as a cause of the act so motivated.

Judges:

Knox J

Citations:

[1995] ICR 520, [1993] UKEAT 270 – 92 – 2107

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Race Relations Act 1976 4(2)

Cited by:

Cited – Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions HL 19-Jun-2003
The court considered whether discriminatory acts after the termination of employment were caught by the respective anti-discrimination Acts. The acts included a failure to give proper references. They pursued claims on the basis of victimisation . .
Cited – O’Neill v Governors of St Thomas More RC School and Another EAT 24-May-1996
The claimant had been dismissed as a teacher by the respondent Roman Catholic school after she became pregnant by a priest. She had been found to have been unfairly dismissed, but the tribunal had rejected her claim of discrimination for pregnancy. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183814

Macculloch and Wallis Ltd v O’Moore: EAT 11 Feb 2003

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Reason for dismissal

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P)

Citations:

EAT/52/02, [2003] UKEAT 51 – 02 – 1102

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – MacCulloch and Wallis Ltd v Moore EAT 11-Feb-2003
EAT Time Off – Public duties . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183617

Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council; Williams v Southampton Institute; Dawson v Stonham Housing Association: EAT 8 Apr 2003

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation
In each case, The employee sought additional damages for non-economic loss after an unfair dismissal.
Held: The Act could be compared with the Discrimination Acts which explicitly awarded damages for hurt feelings. Clear authority lay against such awards in unfair dismissal cases. An Employment Tribunal considering a claim for damages for breach of a contract of employment cannot award general damages: it also cannot award such damages for wrongful dismissal at common law, as if it were a High Court or county court
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P)

Citations:

EAT/726/02, EAT/848/02, Times 09-Jun-2003, [2003] EAT 0726 – 02 – 2205, [2003] UKEAT 0726 – 02 – 2205

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EATn

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Examined – Johnson v Unisys Ltd HL 23-Mar-2001
The claimant contended for a common law remedy covering the same ground as the statutory right available to him under the Employment Rights Act 1996 through the Employment Tribunal system.
Held: The statutory system for compensation for unfair . .
Cited – McCabe v Cornwall County Council, The Governing Body of Mounts Bay School CA 23-Dec-2002
The claimant sought damages for the consequences of having been suspended from work as a teacher. He later recovered damages for unfair dismissal, and the court had struck out his claim for damages over and above those already awarded.
Held: . .
Cited – Wellman Alloys Ltd v Russell 1973
Only economic losses are recoverable following a dismissal. . .
Cited – Norton Tool Co Ltd v Tewson NIRC 30-Oct-1972
(National Industrial Relations Court) The court was asked to calculate damages on a dismissal, and particularly as to whether the manner of the dismissal should affect the damages.
Held: The common law rules and authorities on wrongful . .
Cited – Robert Normansell (Birmingham) Ltd v Barfield 1973
The court refused to award damages for non-economic loss after a dismissal, and particularly in this case for loss of job satisfaction. . .
Cited – Vaughan v Weighpack Ltd NIRC 1974
(National Industrial Relations Court) In a claim for compensation for unfair dismissal, the employee should be treated as having suffered a loss in so far as he received less than he would have received in accordance with good industrial practice. . .
Cited – Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International HL 12-Jun-1997
Allowance of Stigma Damages
The employees claimed damages, saying that the way in which their employer had behaved during their employment had led to continuing losses, ‘stigma damages’ after the termination.
Held: It is an implied term of any contract of employment that . .
Cited – Norton Tool Co Ltd v Tewson NIRC 30-Oct-1972
(National Industrial Relations Court) The court was asked to calculate damages on a dismissal, and particularly as to whether the manner of the dismissal should affect the damages.
Held: The common law rules and authorities on wrongful . .
Cited – Alexander v Home Office CA 1988
Prisoners are a section of the public for the purposes of the 1976 Act. The Court increased an award for injury to feelings awarded for race discrimination by prison officers from pounds 50 to pounds 500. The court considered the appropriate level . .
Cited – Cleveland Ambulance National Health Service Trust v Blane EAT 19-Feb-1997
An Industrial Tribunal can award damages for injured feelings on a complaint of action which fell short of a dismissal.
Held: Judge Peter Clark said: ‘It is nothing to the point that an award for injury to feelings cannot be recovered in a . .
Cited – Haigh v Royal Mail Steampacket Co Ltd CA 1883
”personal injury’ is not ‘loss’ because a limb may be broken without being lost. The word ‘injury’ would certainly have been more apt, but the word ‘damage’ can certainly mean personal injury’. . .
Cited – Taylor v John Webster Buildings Civil Engineering EAT 1999
‘the basic award is to reflect a lost redundancy award; that is its function’. . .
Cited – Addis v Gramophone Company Limited HL 26-Jul-1909
Mr Addis was wrongfully and contumeliously dismissed from his post as the defendant’s manager in Calcutta. He sought additional damages for the manner of his dismissal.
Held: It did not matter whether the claim was under wrongful dismissal. . .
Cited – Watts and Co v Morrow CA 30-Jul-1991
The plaintiff had bought a house on the faith of the defendant’s report that there were only limited defects requiring repair. In fact the defects were much more extensive. The defendant surveyor appealed against an award of damages after his . .
Cited – Farley v Skinner HL 11-Oct-2001
The claimant sought damages from the defendant surveyor. He had asked the defendant whether the house he was to buy was subject to aircraft noise. After re-assurance, he bought the house. The surveyor was wrong and negligent. A survey would not . .
Cited – Gogay v Hertfordshire County Council CA 26-Jul-2000
The employee sought damages for breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, even though she remained throughout the employment of the Council against whom she was bringing proceedings.
Held: Her remaining in employment was a factor . .
Cited – Eastwood v Magnox Electric plc CA 2002
There was a claim for damages in respect of psychiatric injury said to result from a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, which was asserted to be recoverable notwithstanding Johnson, on the basis that the acts of the employer . .
Cited – Boardman v Copeland Borough Council CA 13-Jun-2001
The claimant had ‘neither pleaded nor shown any damage to him during the course of his employment which resulted from his employer’s conduct. The only damage which is demonstrated is that which followed from his dismissal and, arguably, the manner . .
Cited – Page v Smith HL 12-May-1995
The plaintiff was driving his car when the defendant turned into his path. Both cars suffered considerable damage but the drivers escaped physical injury. The Plaintiff had a pre-existing chronic fatigue syndrome, which manifested itself from time . .
Cited – Devine v Designer Flowers Wholesale Florist Sundries Ltd EAT 1993
The claimant’s dismissal caused her to suffer anxiety and depression which rendered her unfit for work.
Held: The fact that the employee’s incapacity was caused by the unfair dismissal did not necessarily mean that she was entitled to . .
Cited – London Fire and Civil Defence Authority v Betty EAT 1994
Tribunals should not be concerned to ascertain whether the illness was caused or contributed to by the employer. The question in issue is whether, in the light of the employee’s medical condition and the inquiries and procedures the employer made . .
Cited – Kumchyk v Derby County Council EAT 1978
The appellant sought to advance an argument that a certain term was implied into the contract of employment which, for its consideration, would have required consideration of a factual framework which had not been explored in evidence.
Held: . .
Cited – Crofton v Yeboah EAT 16-May-2001
After a very long hearing, the appellant had been found guilty of race discrimination in his making of allegations about the behaviour of the respondent in failing to investigate corruption within Hackney London Borough Council.
Held: The . .
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 – Kingston Upon Hull City Council v Dunnachie; HSBC Bank Plc v Drage EAT 7-Jul-2003
EAT Practice and Procedure – Costs
EAT Practice and Procedure – Costs. . .
See Also – Kingston Upon Hull City Council v Dunnachie EAT 23-Jun-2003
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissal. . .
See Also – Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council CA 11-Feb-2004
Compensation for non-economic loss brought about by the manner of an unfair dismissal is, on authority and on principle, recoverable. The award of such compensation by the employment tribunal in the present case was not excessive and was adequately . .
At EAT – Dunnachie v Kingston-upon-Hull City Council HL 15-Jul-2004
The claimant sought damages following his dismissal to include a sum to reflect the manner of his dismissal and the distress caused.
Held: The remarks of Lord Hoffmann in Johnson -v- Unysis were obiter. The court could not, under the section, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Damages

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183076

Chessington World of Adventures Ltd v Reed: EAT 27 Jun 1997

News Group Newspapers Ltd had been joined as a party, in order that it could argue the obvious public interest relating to the importance, which has long been accepted in the courts, of the interest, not just of the press but of the public generally, in freedom of reporting and openness in court hearings. Discrimination associated with a gender re-assignment process was not sex discrimination within the Act.

Judges:

Morison J

Citations:

[1998] ICR 97, [1997] IRLR 556, [1997] UKEAT 1063 – 96 – 2706

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sex Discrimination Act 1975

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – P v S and Cornwall County Council ECJ 30-Apr-1996
An employee at an educational establishment told management that he intended to undergo gender reassignment. He was given notice of dismissal.
Held: The scope of the Directive was not confined to discrimination based on the fact that a person . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police v A, Secretary of State for Education EAT 2-Oct-2001
The Force appealed findings of sex discrimination against the respondent who had undergone gender reassignment. She required the fact of the procedure to be kept secret. The force refused her application for appointment since they said she would be . .
Cited – Ashton v The Chief Constable of West Mercia Constabulary EAT 27-Jul-2000
Where a dismissal was properly related to poor work performance, the fact that such a deterioration in performance was associated with a gender reassignment process being undergone by the employee, did not make the dismissal sex discrimination. To . .
Cited – Goodwin v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jul-2002
The claimant was a post operative male to female trans-sexual. She claimed that her human rights were infringed when she was still treated as a man for National Insurance contributions purposes, where she continued to make payments after the age at . .
Cited – Cart v The Upper Tribunal SC 21-Jun-2011
Limitations to Judicial Reviw of Upper Tribunal
Three claimants sought to challenge decisions of various Upper Tribunals by way of judicial review. In each case the request for judicial review had been first refused on the basis that having been explicitly designated as higher courts, the proper . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183062

Qureshi v Victoria University of Manchester: EAT 21 Jun 1996

The Industrial Tribunal only has jurisdiction to consider and rule upon the act or acts of which complaint is made to it. The questions on a complaint of race discrimination are: (a) Did the act complained of actually occur? (b) If the act complained of occurred in time, was there a difference in race involving the applicant? (c) If a difference in race was involved, was the applicant treated less favourably than the alleged discriminator treated or would treat other persons of a different racial group in the same, or not materially different, relevant circumstances? (d) If there was difference in treatment involving persons of a different race, was that treatment ‘on racial grounds’? Were racial grounds an effective cause of the difference in treatment? What explanation of the less favourable treatment is given by the respondent?

Mummery J said: ‘In the present case, it was necessary for the Tribunal to examine all the allegations made by Dr Qureshi of other incidents relied upon by him as evidentiary facts of race discrimination in the matters complained of. There is a tendency, however, where many evidentiary incidents or items are introduced, to be carried away by them and to treat each of the allegations, incidents or items as if they were themselves the subject of a complaint. In the present case it was necessary for the Tribunal to find the primary facts about those allegations. It was not, however, necessary for the Tribunal to ask itself, in relation to each such incident or item, whether it was itself explicable on ‘racial grounds’ or on other grounds. That is a misapprehension about the nature and purpose of evidentiary facts. The function of the Tribunal is to find the primary facts from which they will be asked to draw inferences and then for the Tribunal to look at the totality of those facts (including the respondent’s explanations) in order to see whether it is legitimate to infer that the acts or decisions complained of in the originating applications were on ‘racial grounds’. The fragmented approach by the Tribunal in this case would inevitably have the effect of diminishing any eloquence that the cumulative effect of the primary facts might have on the issue of racial grounds. The process of inference is itself a matter of applying common sense and judgment to the facts, and assessing the probabilities on the issue whether racial grounds were an effective cause of the acts complained of or were not. The assessment of the parties and their witnesses when they give evidence also form an important part of the process of inference. The Tribunal may find the force of the primary facts is sufficient to justify an inference of racial grounds. It may find that any inference that it might have made is negated by a satisfactory explanation from the respondent of non-racial grounds of action or decision.’

Judges:

Mummery J

Citations:

[2001] ICR 863, [1996] UKEAT 484 – 95 – 2305, EAT/484/95

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – King v Great Britain China Centre CA 1991
The court considered the nature of evidence which will be available to tribunals considering a race discrimination claim.
Held: A complainant must prove his or her case on the balance of probabilities, but it is unusual to find direct evidence . .
Cited – Chapman and Another v Simon CA 1994
The Industrial Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider and rule upon other acts of racial discrimination not included in the complaints in the Originating Application.
Racial discrimination may be established as a matter of direct primary . .

Cited by:

Approved – 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 . .
Cited – The Law Society v Kamlesh Bahl EAT 7-Jul-2003
EAT Sex Discrimination – Direct
The complainant had been suspended from her position as Vice President of the Law Society. The Society and its officers appealed findings of sex and race discrimination . .
Cited – Law Society v Bahl CA 30-Jul-2004
The claimant had succeeded before the employment tribunal in her claim of race discrimination by the respondent and senior officers. She now appealed the reversal of that judgment. The claimant asked the tribunal to draw inferences of discrimination . .
Cited – Driskel v Peninsula Business Services Ltd Michael Huss Anthony Sutcliffe, Peter Done EAT 17-Dec-1999
EAT The claimant said that she had been subjected to crass sexual banter by her senior manager. She refused to take up a post unless he was moved, and when he declined to so, she was dismissed.
The court . .
Cited – Lisboa v Realpubs Ltd and Others EAT 11-Jan-2011
lisboa_realpubsEAT11
EAT SEXUAL ORIENTATION DISCRIMINATION
Whether Respondent’s policy of encouraging a wider clientele at a formerly gay pub involved less favourable treatment of gay customers causing the Claimant to resign in . .
Cited – Cumbria Probation Board v Collingwood EAT 28-May-2008
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
Disability / Disability related discrimination / Reasonable adjustments
JURISDICTIONAL POINTS
>2002 Act and pre-action requirements
The date of disability is . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183405

J Sainsbury Plc v Moger: 25 Feb 1994

The EAT should not accept an order by consent unless it is satisfied that there are good grounds for making the order.

Judges:

Mummery J P

Citations:

[1994] UKEAT 596 – 93 – 2502, [1994] ICR 800

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Hogg v Dover College EAT 1990
The claimant asserted unfair dismissal after his contract was changed to provide that his post as head of the history department would be part time. He had been ill, and the head teacher reduced his teaching periods. He accepted the change in . .

Cited by:

Approved – Re M (A Minor) (Care Orders: Threshold Conditions) HL 7-Jun-1994
The father had been sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of the child’s mother. Application was made for the child to be made subject to a care order. The father appealed refusal of an order.
Held: When an application was made on the . .
Cited – A McKenzie v East Sussex County Council EAT 13-Dec-1999
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability
The parties sought to settle the appeal by consent. The Tribunal was obliged to consider the merits before making an order. In this case the order requested was . .
Cited – AB v CD EAT 13-Nov-1997
The claimant had been a cook. A poster was put up at work redrawn to show her in a sexually suggestive pose. The court now considered an appeal agreed by consent by the parties.
Held: Since the case had been heard, the Court of Appeal in Tower . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182967

McDermid v Nash Dredging and Reclamation Co Ltd: HL 2 Jul 1986

The Court explained the duty of an employer towards his employees as regards their safety: ‘an employer owes to his employee a duty to exercise reasonable care to ensure that the system of work provided for him is a safe one. Secondly, a provision of a safe system of work has two aspects: (a) the devising of such a system and (b) the operation of it. Thirdly, the duty concerned has been described alternatively as either personal or non-delegable. The meaning of these expressions is not self-evident and needs explaining. The essential characteristic of the duty is that if it is not performed it is no defence for the employer to show that he delegated his performance to a person, whether his servant or not his servant, whom he reasonably believed to be competent to perform it. Despite such delegation the employer is liable for the non-performance of the duty.’

Judges:

Lord Brandon

Citations:

[1986] 3 WLR 45, [1986] 2 All ER 676 CA, [1986] QB 965, [1986] UKHL 5

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority CA 1986
A prematurely-born baby was the subject of certain medical procedures, in the course of which a breach of duty occurred. to ensure that the correct amount was administered it was necessary to insert a catheter into an umbilical artery so that his . .
Cited – Mullaney v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 15-May-2001
The claimant police officer was severely injured making an arrest. He claimed damages from the respondent for contributory negligence of other officers in failing to come to his assistance.
Held: If a police officer owes a duty of care to . .
Cited – Woodland v Essex County Council SC 23-Oct-2013
The claimant had been seriously injured in an accident during a swimming lesson. She sought to claim against the local authority, and now appealed against a finding that it was not responsible, having contracted out the provision of swimming . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Health and Safety

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182973

Croft v Broadstairs and St Peter’s Town Council: CA 15 Apr 2003

The claimant acted as the town clerk. After an unexpected letter about her conduct there were meetings and correspondence. Her initial shock and distress were so exacerbated that she was rendered incapable of work through depression. The triggering factor was not the work she was required to do but receipt of the letter which the council accepted would not have been written had it known of her psychiatric problems. The judge found for Mrs Croft.
Held: The fact that two town councillors knew that Mrs Croft had been undergoing counselling was not enough to establish that the council knew of her psychiatric vulnerability. Potter LJ: that left the council in a position of employers who were entitled to expect ordinary robustness in Mrs Croft in an employment context, including disciplinary matters in which she had never been involved before. Her breakdown was not reasonably foreseeable.

Judges:

Potter LJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 676

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hartman v South Essex Mental Health and Community Care NHS Trust etc CA 19-Jan-2005
The court considered the liability of employers for stress injury to several employees.
Held: Though the principles of awarding damages for stress related psychiatric injury are the same as those for physical injury, the issues have still . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182328

Vincent v M J Gallagher Contractors Ltd: CA 15 Apr 2003

At a preliminary hearing, the EAT allowed the appeal to go forward to a full hearing on two of the five grounds advanced. There was an appeal to the Court of Appeal against that ruling.
Held: The points at issue were closely related and within a comparatively narrow compass. It had been unnecessaary to restrict the grounds of appeal, and the claimant shoud have had opportunity to argue all five grounds of appeal. The case was remitted to the EAT.

Judges:

Pill, Scott Baker LJJ, Wilson J

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 640, Times 23-May-2003, [2003] ICR 1244

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Lambe v 186K Ltd CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been dismissed for redundancy, but the company had been found not to have consulted him properly, and he had therefore been unfairly dismissed. The tribunal had then found that even if consulted the result would not have been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182332

Norton Tool Co Ltd v Tewson: NIRC 30 Oct 1972

(National Industrial Relations Court) The court was asked to calculate damages on a dismissal, and particularly as to whether the manner of the dismissal should affect the damages.
Held: The common law rules and authorities on wrongful dismissal are irrelevant. That cause of action is quite unaffected by the Act which has created an entirely new cause of action, namely, the ‘Unfair Industrial Practice’ of unfair dismissal. The measure of compensation for that statutory wrong is itself the creature of statute and is to be found in the Act of 1971 and nowhere else.
Donaldson P said: ‘The amount to be awarded is that which is just and equitable in all the circumstances, having regard to the loss sustained by the complainant. ‘Loss’ in the context of section of 116 does not include injury to pride or feelings. In its natural meaning the word is not to be so construed, and that this meaning is intended seems to us to be clear from the elaboration contained in section 116(2). The discretionary element is introduced by the words ‘having regard to the loss’. This does not mean that the court of tribunal can have regard to other matters, but rather that the amount of the compensation is not precisely and arithmetically related to the approved loss . . The circumstances of the dismissal were relevant only if they were such as to cause or to be likely to cause future loss. Injury to the employee’s pride or feelings is not loss and is irrelevant . . We need only consider whether the manner and circumstances of his dismissal could give rise to any risk of financial loss at a later stage by, for example, making him less acceptable to potential employers or exceptionally liable to selection for dismissal.’ It was good industrial relations practice for an employer who dismisses without notice to make a payment in lieu of notice. Where such sums are paid, no credit has to be given by the employee for monies earned by the employee from other employers in the notice period. It was held that damages for unfair dismissal should therefore include full pay for the notice period without reduction for mitigation.

Judges:

Donaldson P

Citations:

[1972] IRLR 86 NIRC, [1973] 1 WLR 45, [1972] ICR 501

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Industrial Relations Act 1971 116(1)

Citing:

Cited – Addis v Gramophone Company Limited HL 26-Jul-1909
Mr Addis was wrongfully and contumeliously dismissed from his post as the defendant’s manager in Calcutta. He sought additional damages for the manner of his dismissal.
Held: It did not matter whether the claim was under wrongful dismissal. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Flexible Ducting Ltd v Stirling EAT 25-Sep-2001
The issue was the valuation of share options no longer exercisable by the claimant after dismissal. Any assessment involved unwelcome speculation, but the tribunal had recognised the need to take a broad approach. No error of law was shown in the ET . .
Cited – Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International HL 12-Jun-1997
Allowance of Stigma Damages
The employees claimed damages, saying that the way in which their employer had behaved during their employment had led to continuing losses, ‘stigma damages’ after the termination.
Held: It is an implied term of any contract of employment that . .
Cited – Jones v Lingfield Leisure Plc CA 18-Jun-1998
The claimant had been unfairly dismissed but in addition to this employment she had also lost her earnings from a private practice as an aerobics teacher at the same facility where she was employed. She had been awarded damages for the employment . .
Cited – Leonard v Strathclyde Buses Ltd 1998
To receive a compensatory award, a claimant must provide proof of loss. Referring to Norton Tool, Lord Blofeld said: ‘The approach . . has, as we understand the position, governed the attitude of tribunals to compensation ever since. It is, in our . .
Cited – Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council; Williams v Southampton Institute; Dawson v Stonham Housing Association EAT 8-Apr-2003
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation
In each case, The employee sought additional damages for non-economic loss after an unfair dismissal.
Held: The Act could be compared with the Discrimination Acts . .
Followed – Wellman Alloys Ltd v Russell 1973
Only economic losses are recoverable following a dismissal. . .
Folowed – Robert Normansell (Birmingham) Ltd v Barfield 1973
The court refused to award damages for non-economic loss after a dismissal, and particularly in this case for loss of job satisfaction. . .
Cited – O’Donoghue v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council CA 17-May-2001
The Tribunal had been entitled to find on the evidence that an employee unfairly dismissed by reason of sex would have been fairly dismissed for misconduct six months later in any event because of her antagonistic and intransigent attitude. The . .
Cited – Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council; Williams v Southampton Institute; Dawson v Stonham Housing Association EAT 8-Apr-2003
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation
In each case, The employee sought additional damages for non-economic loss after an unfair dismissal.
Held: The Act could be compared with the Discrimination Acts . .
Cited – Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council CA 11-Feb-2004
Compensation for non-economic loss brought about by the manner of an unfair dismissal is, on authority and on principle, recoverable. The award of such compensation by the employment tribunal in the present case was not excessive and was adequately . .
Cited – Dunnachie v Kingston-upon-Hull City Council HL 15-Jul-2004
The claimant sought damages following his dismissal to include a sum to reflect the manner of his dismissal and the distress caused.
Held: The remarks of Lord Hoffmann in Johnson -v- Unysis were obiter. The court could not, under the section, . .
Cited – Langley and Another v Burso EAT 3-Mar-2006
The claimant had been dismissed shortly after becoming unable to work. She sought payment of her normal salary during the period of notice saying this was established good practice.
Held: ‘We are put in the invidious position of being bound by . .
Cited – Stepek (J) Ltd v Hough NIRC 1973
. .
Cited – Hilti (Great Britain) Ltd v Windridge EAT 1974
EAT The employer appealed against the tribunal’s decision to make an award to compensate the respondent for the loss of entitlement to an extended statutory notice period.
Held: The award was upheld. Lord . .
Cited – Everwear Candlewick Ltd v Isaac EAT 2-Jan-1974
Sir John Brightman referred to Norton Tool, Stepek and Hilti and then said: ‘The principle behind these three cases is clear. If an employee is unfairly dismissed without due notice and without pay in lieu of notice, he is prima facie entitled to . .
Cited – Vaughan v Weighpack Ltd NIRC 1974
(National Industrial Relations Court) In a claim for compensation for unfair dismissal, the employee should be treated as having suffered a loss in so far as he received less than he would have received in accordance with good industrial practice. . .
Applied – Blackwell v GEC Elliott Processes 1976
. .
Not applied – Tradewinds Airways v Fletcher EAT 1981
The employee, an airline pilot, was entitled to three months contractual notice. The Tribunal had awarded compensation for the full three months even although he had earned a salary from other employment during part of that period.
Bristow J . .
Cited – TBA Industrial Products Ltd v Locke EAT 1984
The employee had been unfairly dismissed with 12 weeks pay in lieu of notice.
Held: The court re-affirmed the narrow principle of Norton Tool v Tewson. Browne Wilkinson J P said: ‘It seems to us that the decision in the Tradewinds [1981] IRLR . .
Cited – Stuart Peters Limited v Bell EAT 22-Oct-2008
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Compensation/Mitigation of loss
The employee was unfairly constructively dismissed. She was entitled to a 6 month notice period that was not paid by the employees in that period, . .
Cited – Stuart Peters Ltd v Bell CA 30-Jul-2009
The claimant had a contract entitling her to six month’s notice. She left claiming constructive dismissed, but found work shortly after. She still sought the full six months’ pay. The EAT found in her favour. The employer appealed.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Damages

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182102

Bryant v The Foreign and Commnonwealth Office: EAT 10 Mar 2003

Section 94(1) of the 1996 Act did not apply to protect a British national locally engaged to work in the British Embassy in Rome.

Judges:

Burton P J

Citations:

EAT/174/02, [2003] EAT 174 – 02 – 1003, [2003] UKEAT 174 – 02 – 1003

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EAT

Statutes:

Employment Rights Act 1996 94(1)

Cited by:

Cited – Serco Ltd v Lawson; Botham v Ministry of Defence; Crofts and others v Veta Limited HL 26-Jan-2006
Mr Lawson was employed by Serco as a security supervisor at the British RAF base on Ascension Island, which is a dependency of the British Overseas Territory of St Helena. Mr Botham was employed as a youth worker at various Ministry of Defence . .
Cited – Duncombe and Others v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (No 2) SC 15-Jul-2011
The court considered whether a teacher employed by the Secretary of State to teach in one of its European Schools was entitled to protection against unfair dismissal.
Held: The claimants’ appeals were allowed and the cases remitted to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.181360

London Borough of Southwark v Jiminez: CA 8 Apr 2003

The appellant authority complained that the tribunal had expressed its view strongly before hearing the evidence and had so demonstrated that its mind was closed.
Held: There was no inevitability that a strongly expressed conditional view amounted to a pre-judgement or a closed mind. Nevertheless a tribunal expressing a view would be well advised to make it quite clear that the view was preliminary only. The more trenchant the view expressed the greater the need for clarity.

Judges:

Peter Gibson, Clarke LJJ, Richards J

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 502, Gazette 12-Jun-2003, [2003] IRLR 477, [2003] ICR 1176

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Leave – London Borough of Southwark v Jiminez CA 31-Jul-2002
Renewed application for leave to appeal – granted on limited grounds . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wagner (Advocates’ Conduct – Fair Hearing) UTIAC 6-Nov-2015
UTIAC (i) Legitimate advocacy does not extend to aggressive questioning of, or confrontation with, a party or witness. The Tribunal should intervene where this occurs.
(ii) Similarly, mere comments by an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Natural Justice

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.181174

Bruce and Others v Wiggins Teape (Stationery) Ltd: EAT 13 May 1994

Employees appealed against decisions that their employer had not made unlawful deductions from their wages. The company had unilaterally reduced the rate of overtime pay.
Held: The appeal was allowed.
Mummery J P said: ‘the reason why the Industrial Tribunal erred in law was that it misconstrued the provisions of the Wages Act 1986 and the decisions on it as drawing a distinction between a deduction from wages and a reduction in wages. That is a false antithesis. On a proper analysis of the provisions of the 1986 Act and their application to the facts of this case the Tribunal could only have come to one conclusion: deductions were made and were unauthorised.’

Judges:

Mummery J P

Citations:

[1994] IRLR 536, [1994] UKEAT 1050 – 93 – 1305

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Wages Act 1986 8(3)

Citing:

Cited – Rigby v Ferodo Ltd HL 1988
The House considered a claim for constructive dismissal where the employer had changed the terms of the employment contract by unilaterally imposing a pay cut.
Held: It was possible for an employee to continue to work under protest as to the . .
Cited – Delaney v Staples CA 1991
Any failure by an employer to pay any amount of wages properly payable to an employee amounts to a deduction from his wages for the purposes of section 7. The basic object of the 1986 Act is ‘to see that workers receive their wages in full at the . .

Cited by:

Applied – John Dickie Homes Ltd v Jones EAT 3-Sep-2001
The employers had employed bricklayers as self-employed sub-contractors. They changed them over to employees, reducing pay to allow for the additional costs of employing them. The claimant had worked for them under the old system, and returned after . .
Cited – New Century Cleaning Co Ltd v Church CA 26-Mar-1999
The employer had withheld ten per cent of the claimant’s wages, Employees worked in teams cleaning windows in office blocks. The team agreed how the fee for the block would be divided. The employer reduced its fees to customers, and accordingly the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.181099

FDR Ltd v Holloway: EAT 26 Apr 1995

Appeal against the decision of the Industrial Tribunal that FDR, Respondents to proceedings brought by Mr Holloway claiming unfair selection for redundancy, should provide discovery of specified documents and further particulars relating to Mr Holloway’s selection for redundancy.

Judges:

Mummery P H

Citations:

[1995] IRLR 400, [1995] UKEAT 240 – 95 – 2604

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Lowe v Everest Ltd and others EAT 3-Aug-2001
The respondents had decided to make redundancies. They had two shifts of workers, and those eventually selected came predominantly from the one shift. The question was whether the method chosen for selection was fair or unfair. In cases of mass . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180899

BLP UK Ltd v Marsh: CA 16 Jan 2003

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 132

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – BLP UK Ltd v Marsh EAT 10-Apr-2002
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Other . .
Leave – BLP UK Ltd v Marsh CA 23-Aug-2002
application for permission to appeal . .
See Also – BLP UK Ltd v Marsh EAT 12-Jun-2001
. .

Cited by:

CA Appeal – BLP UK Ltd v Marsh CA 23-Aug-2002
application for permission to appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180709

Grady v HM Prison Service: CA 11 Apr 2003

The applicant appealed striking out of her employment claims against the respondent. She had been made bankrupt after lodging her appeal to the EAT, and the EAT had held that she lacked standing to pursue her claim.
Held: Employment claims are in their essential nature personal and not proprietary, and did not vest in the trustee in bankruptcy. A claim for re-instatement or re-engagement and some of the compensation awards were not capable of being things in action, though the eventual fund created in any award might be. There is ‘no bright line’ between personal rights of action and those which form part of a bankrupt’s estate, but that all the reasoning in the authorities ‘tends to place on the non-vesting side of the line a claim which is primarily directed at the restoration of a contractual relationship in which the claimant’s skill and labour are the essential commodity’.

Judges:

Thorpe, Sedley LJJ, Richards J

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 527, Times 18-Apr-2003, [2003] 3 All ER 745

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Employment Rights Act 1996 112 113 114 115 116 117

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Mulkerrins v Pricewaterhouse Coopers HL 31-Jul-2003
The claimant sought damages from her former accountants for failing to protect her from bankruptcy. The receiver had unnecessarily caused great difficulties in making their claim that such an action vested in them. The defendants had subsequently, . .
Cited – Sukui-Lennard v Croydon Primary Healthcare Trust CA 22-Jul-2003
The appellant sought to appeal a striking out of her complaint of race discrimination. She appealed from the Employment Appeal Tribunal which had rejected her appeal in its preliminary hearing procedure.
Held: The Court of Appeal had the power . .
Cited – Lambe v 186K Ltd CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been dismissed for redundancy, but the company had been found not to have consulted him properly, and he had therefore been unfairly dismissed. The tribunal had then found that even if consulted the result would not have been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Insolvency

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180740

P Byrne v Arvin Meritor LVS (UK) Ltd: EAT 22 Jan 2003

EAT The appellant had taken a temporary promotion with re-assurances that on completion he would return to his former position. That old role disappeared during the period. The temporary role finished early and other short term roles were offered. The nearest equivalent role was offered but iin a different city. He rejected it and was made redundant. He now appealed against rejection of his claim for unfair dismissal. He said that the Tribunal had failed to set out its reasoning properly.
Held: The tribunal had failed, when discussing ‘bumping’ of employees on redundancy, to distinguish beween vacant and non-vacant positions. However no different result could follow.
EAT Redundancy – Fairness.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P)

Citations:

EAT/239/02, [2003] EAT 239 – 02 – 2201, [2003] UKEAT 239 – 02 – 2201

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EATn

Citing:

Cited – Green v A and I Fraser (Wholesale Fish Merchants) Ltd EAT 1985
EAT One of four drivers was to be made redundant. The claimant had the shortest service and was selected on this basis. He said that another employee, with occasional driving duties and shorter service should . .
Cited – Mugford v Midland Bank Plc EAT 23-Jan-1997
The court considered the test for reasonableness in a procedure for selection for redundancy. Peter Clarke J said: ‘As to whether a reasonable employer would or would not consult with an individual employee is, it seems to us, essentially a question . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180605

Metanie v Pertemps Recruitment Partnership Ltd T/A Pertemp Industrial Contracts: EAT 15 Jan 2003

EAT Unlawful Deduction from Wages

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P)

Citations:

EAT/1389/00, [2003] UKEAT 1389 – 00 – 1501

Links:

Bailii, EAT

Citing:

See Also – Metanie v Pertemps Recruitment Partnership Ltd ((T/A Pertemps Industrial Contracts) EAT 11-May-2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180610

Green v The Governing Body Victoria Road Primary School Kent County Council: EAT 24 Feb 2003

EAT Jurisdiction – appeal from an Employment Tribunal held at Ashford, Kent, who, following a Preliminary Hearing on 27 February 2002, unanimously decided that the named second Respondents, Kent County Council, should be dismissed from the proceedings.

Judges:

His Hon Judge Ansell

Citations:

EAT/447/02, [2003] EAT 0447 – 02 – 1803, [2003] UKEAT 0447 – 02 – 1803, [2004] ICR 684

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EAT

Cited by:

Cited – Murphy v Slough Borough Council Governing Body of Langleywood School CA 16-Feb-2005
The court was asked as to who was the appropriate respondent when a claim for disability discrimination is brought by a teacher employed at a maintained community school with a delegated budget. The teacher’s contract of employment is with the local . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180598

D Bamsey and others v Albon Engineering Ltd: EAT 3 Mar 2003

EAT Working Time Regulations – holiday pay calculation

Judges:

His Hon Judge Ansell

Citations:

EAT/365/02, [2003] EAT 365 – 02 – 2703, [2003] UKEAT 365 – 02 – 2703, [2003] ICR 1224

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EAT

Cited by:

Appeal from – D Bamsey and others v Albon Engineering and Manufacturing Plc CA 25-Mar-2004
The applicants worked under an arrangement where they received considerable payments additional to their basic pay for compulsory overtime, but the holiday pay was calculated by the employer on the basic pay.
Held: The 1998 Regulations were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180595

Nicholls v London Borough of Greenwich: CA 3 Apr 2003

The claimant had been employed by the respondent, and earned a pension. She challenged legislation which appeared to operate retrospectively to reduce that pension. The respondent argued that the amount agreed to be paid exceeded the maximum statutory amount, and that a payment made upon termination was not to an officer holding a position.
Held: The promise of payment of a retirement gratuity was a term or condition of the contract appointing her to hold office as a school cleaner. It was a part of her employment package. That her contract was terminating did not mean it was not paid to her as a person holding office. Retrospectivity which appeared to take away a right should only be read from the clearest of words.

Judges:

Lord Justice May, Lord Justice Mummery The President

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 416, Times 21-Apr-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Superannuation Act 1972 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Yew Bon Tew v Kenderaan Bas Mara PC 7-Oct-1982
(Malaysia) In 1972 the appellants were injured by the respondent’s bus. At that time the local limitation period was 12 months. In 1974 the limitation period became three years. The appellants issued a writ in 1975. To succeed they would have to sue . .
Cited – Arnold v Central Electricity Generating Board HL 22-Oct-1987
The plaintiff was widow and administratrix of the estate of her deceased husband. He had worked from April 1938 to April 1943 for a predecessor to the CEGB. He had been exposed to asbestos dust as a result of his employer’s negligence and breach of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180454

Perch, Dennie and Commissiong v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago: PC 20 Feb 2003

PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The postal system had been transferred to a company. Employees complained that they had been public servants and had lost privileges associated with that employment, and provisions of the Act transferring their contracts were unconstitutional.
Held: Employees of the new corporation were not holders of any public office and were not employed in the service of the Government in a civil capacity within the meaning of section 3(1) of the Constitution. The law recognised retirement as an appropriate means of leaving public service, and that option had been offerred. Abolition was also allowed, and therefore the transfer was not unconstitutional.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Hutton, Lord Millett, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe

Citations:

[2003] UKPC 17

Links:

PC, Bailii, PC

Citing:

Cited – Thomas v Attorney-General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 1982
The court deprecated the ‘spoils’ system which operated within the post office.
Lord Diplock set out the purposeof the constitutional commission: ‘The whole purpose of Chapter VIII of the Constitution which bears the rubric ‘The Public Service’ . .
Cited – Porter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
Cited – Trendtex Trading Corporation v Central Bank of Nigeria CA 1977
The court considered the developing international jurisdiction over commercial activities of state bodies which might enjoy state immunity, and sought to ascertain whether or not the Central Bank of Nigeria was entitled to immunity from suit.
Cited – Tamlin v Hannaford CA 1950
Discussing the Brtitish Transport Commission, Denning LJ said: ‘It is not the Crown and has none of the immunities or privileges of the Crown. Its servants are not civil servants, and its property is not Crown property. It is as much bound by Acts . .
Cited – Young v Waller 1898
A legislature or (subject to any relevant legislation) a government may abolish a public office in the interests of good administration. . .
Cited – Reilly v The King HL 1934
The government has power to abolish a public service post, and it is an ‘elementary proposition that if further performance of a contract becomes impossible by legislation having that effect the contract is discharged’. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Antigua Public Utilities Authority v Malcolm Alphonso Edwards PC 2-Oct-2003
PC (Antigua and Barbuda) Upon the transfer of utilities into private companies controlled by the government, the respondent’s employment was also to be transferred. The issue concerned his new contract terms. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Employment, Constitutional

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179800

Donnelan and others v Britton Taco Ltd: EAT 8 Oct 2002

EAT Transfer of Undertakings – Dismissal
EAT Transfer of Undertakings – Dismissal.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Wall

Citations:

[2002] EAT 1058 – 00 – 1012, EAT/1058/00

Links:

Bailii, EATn, EAT

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Donnelan and others v Britton Taco Ltd EAT 29-Nov-2000
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Donnelan and others v Britton Taco Ltd EAT 10-Dec-2002
EAT Redundancy – Collective Consultation and Information . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179974

Oakley v Merseyside Magistrates Court Committee: EAT 2 Mar 2003

EAT Redundancy – Collective Consultation and Information

Judges:

His Hon Judge Ansell

Citations:

EAT/379/02, [2003] EAT 379 – 02 – 0303, [2003] UKEAT 379 – 02 – 0303

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, EAT

Citing:

Cited – Regina v British Coal Corporation, Ex Parte Price and Others QBD 28-May-1993
British Coal had the power to close coal mines once the unions had been consulted. The court gave guidance on the extent of consultation necessary.
Held: Fair consultation will involve consultation while consultations are at a formative stage; . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179931

In re P (a minor by his mother and litigation friend); P v National Association of Schoolmasters/Union of Women Teachers: HL 27 Feb 2003

The pupil had been excluded from school but then ordered to be re-instated. The teachers, through their union, refused to teach him claiming that he was disruptive. The claimant appealed a refusal of an injunction. The injunction had been refused on the basis that this was an employment dispute. The union had failed successfully to ballot all its members at the school.
Held: A trade dispute is a dispute between workers and their employers which relates wholly or mainly to terms and conditions of employment. The court noted a clear mistake in the provisions of the Act relating to ballots, and hoped that it would be corrected. The Act allowed a vote of all members so far as was reasonably practicable.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Scott of Foscote and Walker of Gestingthorpe

Citations:

Times 06-Mar-2003, [2003] UKHL 8, Gazette 01-May-2003, [2003] IRLR 307, [2003] ELR 357, [2003] 1 All ER 993, [2003] ICR 386, [2003] 2 WLR 545, [2003] 2 AC 663

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1992 244(1), School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Act 1991, Education (School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions)(No. 3) Order 2000 (SI 2000/2321)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – P v National Association of School Masters/Union of Women Teachers CA 25-May-2001
Industrial action taken by teachers refusing to teach a disruptive pupil was related to their terms and conditions of employment. Encouragement to take such action by the teachers’ union made the union responsible for such action. The breach related . .
Cited – British Broadcasting Corporation v Hearn CA 1977
Union members working for the BBC threatened to refuse to transmit its television signal to a satellite over the Indian Ocean during the Cup Final because the satellite broadcast would be receivable in South Africa. The refusal followed a union . .
Cited – Hadmor Productions Ltd v Hamilton HL 1982
The Court of Appeal was not in general entitled to reverse the decision of the Administrative Court in the grant of discretionary interlocutory relief: ‘it is I think appropriate to remind your Lordships of the limited function of an appellate court . .
Cited – Universe Tankships Inc of Monrovia v International Transport Workers Federation HL 1-Apr-1981
A ship belonging to the appellants had been blacked by the defendant union. Negotiations to clear the threat resulted in payment by the appellants to a welfare fund of the defendant. The company sought its refund saying that it had been paid under . .
Cited – Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service HL 17-Oct-2002
The applicant sought assistance from the local authority. He suffered from spinal myeloma, was destitute and an asylum seeker.
Held: Although the Act had withdrawn the obligation to provide assistance for many asylum seekers, those who were . .
Cited – London Underground Ltd v National Union of Railwaymen, Maritime and Transport Workers (NURMT) CA 9-Oct-1995
A Union’s immunity from action was not lost where employees who had joined the company after the strike ballot had been completed, were encouraged by the union to join in the strike. The constituency defined in section 227(1) must include all . .
Cited – Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart HL 26-Nov-1992
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute
The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the . .
Cited – Mercury Communications Ltd v Scott-Garner CA 1984
To count as a trade dispute, the dispute must ‘relate wholly or mainly’ to terms and conditions of employment and must not merely be ‘connected’ with them. The application of this test requires the court: ‘to consider not merely the occasion which . .
Cited – Hadmor Productions Ltd v Hamilton HL 1982
The Court of Appeal was not in general entitled to reverse the decision of the Administrative Court in the grant of discretionary interlocutory relief: ‘it is I think appropriate to remind your Lordships of the limited function of an appellate court . .
Cited – Post Office v Union of Communication Workers CA 1990
De minimis principle inindustrial relations ballots. . .
Cited – NWL Ltd v Woods HL 1979
The phrase ‘trade dispute’ was defined by reference to (i) the parties to it and (ii) the subject matter. Lord Scarman referred to the legislative history of attempts to regulate strike actions by trades unions: ‘It is wrong to attempt to construe . .
Cited – London Underground Ltd and Others v National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Worker CA 16-Feb-2001
When a union gave notice to the employer that it intended to hold a ballot as to industrial action, the union was obliged to give details of the members to be balloted, so as to permit the employer to exercise its own rights. ‘Information as to the . .
Cited – Express Newspapers Ltd v McShane HL 1980
There had been a dispute over pay between the proprietors of local newspapers and journalists employed by them, the majority of whom were members of a trade union, the NUJ. Strike action was taken against the local newspapers. Those newspapers . .
Cited – Blackpool and the Fylde College v Naitonal Association of Teachers In Further and Higher Education CA 23-Mar-1994
A trades union is to tell the employer who is being balloted for strike action. Its notice of industrial action must identify those to be ballotted. . .
Cited – Duport Steels Ltd v Sirs HL 3-Jan-1980
Judiciary must Interpret, not Remedy the Law
The House emphasised the need for courts to be even handed in interpreting statutes dealing with industrial relations. Where the words of the statute are plain and unambiguous, the Court ought to give effect to that plain meaning.
Lord Diplock . .
Cited – British Railways Board v National Union of Railwaymen CA 1989
The court discussed section 11(2) of the 1984 Act: ‘Simplifying that a little bit and reading it with section 11(1), which defines who is qualified and entitled to vote, section 11(2) is saying ‘If you do not allow somebody to vote, if you say ‘You . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Education

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179611

Walton v The Independent Living Organisation: CA 26 Feb 2003

The worker was employed as a carer for a lady who would need support at unpredictable times, but on average she would need some 6 hours’ care a day. Whilst at work, the claimant would stay with her patient for a full 24 hour day, but, except when actually engaged in giving care, she was free to do as she wished. The National Minimum Wage Team said her that daily pay should be divided by 24 to give her hourly rate, and her employer contended that it should be calculated on the average time attending her patient.
Held: The Regulations distinguished between ‘time work’ and ‘unmeasured work’. If her duties did not fall within the time work definition, the basis became unmeasured. Regulation 3(a) could not refer to any payment including a reference to time, since this would make 3(b) unnecessary. Accordingly 3(a) concerned the work which was to be paid for. This is a factual question for each case. In this case she was not paid by reference to the time she actually worked. It was not therefore time work, but unmeasured work.

Judges:

Lord Justice Aldous The Hon Mr Justice Jacob Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

Times 27-Feb-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 199, Gazette 01-May-2003, [2003] IRLR 469, [2003] ICR 688

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999 (1999 No 584) 3(a) 3(b), National Minimum Wage Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – J M Walton v The Independent Living Organisation Ltd EAT 21-Mar-2002
The applicant worked as a care assistant. She was required to be resident but worked shifts through the week. She appealed a finding that she was working ‘unmeasured time’ under regulation 6, asserting that it should have been judged to be ‘time . .
Cited – British Nursing Association v Inland Revenue (National Minimum Wage Compliance Team) CA 2002
The employers provided ‘bank nurses’ for nursing homes and other institutions on an emergency basis, including a 24 hour telephone booking service. At night employees were based at home. The ‘duty nurse’ would answered a diverted phone call and then . .
Cited – The British Nursing Assocation v The Inland Revenue National Minimum Wage Compliance Team EAT 8-Jun-2001
The applicants appealed a finding that their employees were workers within the regulations. The question related to whether bank nurses, who were available to be called on the telephone at home during the night, were working as they waited. The . .
Distinguished – Scottbridge Construction Ltd v James Wright OHCS 25-Oct-2002
The claimant worked as a night watchman, on 7 nights a week between 5pm and 7am. His principal purpose was to be available there to respond if an alarm was set off by an intruder. When not performing a specific task, he could do whatever he wanted. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179567

Regina (on the Application of Redgrave) v The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: CA 22 Jan 2003

The police officer had been accused of an offence. The case was discharged under the section at committal. The Commissioner sought to commence disciplinary proceedings on the same evidence.
Held: The tests of the two sets of hearings were different. The magistrates had been asked to see whether there was sufficient evidence to justify putting him on a criminal trial. The case had been dismissed by the magistrates, but that was not a finding of innocence under s104, and no double jeopardy arose. The double jeopardy rule has no application save to other courts of competent jurisdiction.

Judges:

Mr Justice Scott Baker, Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Simon Brown

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 4

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

The Police (Discipline) Regulations 1985 7, Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 6, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 104

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (on the application of Whitehead and Daglish) v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Admn 2001
Criminal charges against the officers had been stayed. They subsequently faced disciplinary proceedings.
Held: An acquittal is a finding or determination that a defendant is not guilty of an offence. A stay does not involve such a finding. . .
Cited – Connelly v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1964
Plea of Autrefois Acquit is Narrow in Scope
The defendant had been tried for and acquitted of murder. The prosecution then sought to have him tried for robbery out of the same alleged facts. The House considered his plea of autrefois convict.
Held: The majority identified a narrow . .
Cited – Regina v Police Complaints Board ex parte Madden and Rhone 1983
Double jeopardy, properly understood, is best described in the phrase ‘No man should be tried twice for the same offence’. The court emphasised the word ‘tried’. . .
Cited – Regina v Manchester City Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte S Nelson CACD 1977
Challenge was made to the institution of fresh committal proceedings following the applicant’s discharge at an earlier committal hearing when, the prosecution’s application for an adjournment having been refused, no evidence was offered against him. . .
Cited – Brooks v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another PC 2-Mar-1994
(Jamaica) The DPP successfully applied for a voluntary bill after the resident magistrate had discharged the defendant on the ground that having heard the evidence, there was no case to answer. The challenge to the DPP’s decision to seek a voluntary . .
Cited – Ziderman v General Dental Council PC 1976
Lord Diplock said: ‘The purpose of disciplinary proceedings against a dentist who has been convicted of a criminal offence by a court of law is not to punish him a second time for the same offence but to protect the public who may come to him as . .
Cited – Regina v Statutory Committee of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain 1981
The court asked if the Latin maxim ‘nemo debit bis vexari, si constat curiae quod sit pro una et eadem causa’, or ‘nemo debet bis punire pro uno delicto’ (no one ought to be twice punished for the same offence) were relevant where criminal charges . .
Cited – Saeed v Greater London Council (Inner London Education Authority) 1985
The plaintiff had been acquitted of assaulting a child at the school. His employers nevertheless brought disciplinary proceedings alleging misconduct identical to those which had formed the basis of the previous criminal proceedings. The plaintiff . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.178804

Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2): CA 20 Dec 2002

The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of andpound;25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed.
Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment tribunal decision. It did not look to see whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal had erred in law in reviewing that decision (Hennessy). This did not change with Civil Procedure Rules 52.11. Courts should be reluctant to award very substantial sums for injury to feelings. The most serious cases should be in the bracket andpound;15,000 to andpound;25,000, and the top figure should be exceeded only in the most exceptional cases. The court set out three broad elements of the compensation to be awarded in such cases. From andpound;5,000 to andpound;15,000 is appropriate for other serious cases. andpound;500 to andpound;5,000 is appropriate for not serious cases, including one off acts. A sum of less than andpound;500 should not be awarded, since this would appear an insult.

Judges:

Lord Justice Jonathan Parker, Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Ward

Citations:

Times 27-Dec-2002, Gazette 13-Mar-2003, [2003] ICR 318, [2002] EWCA Civ 1871, [2003] IRLR 102

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 52.11, Sex Discrimination Act 1975 66(4), Employment Tribunals Act 1996 21 35 37

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hennessy v Craigmyle and Co Ltd CA 1986
Sir John Donaldson MR said: ‘It is too often forgotten that, in the context of appeals from the Employment Appeal Tribunal, the Court of Appeal is a second tier of the appellate court . . second tier appellate courts are primarily concerned with the . .
See Also – The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire v Vento EAT 8-Jun-2000
EAT A claim was made for sex discrimination. The tribunal considered the approach to be taken in the absence of a real comparator.
Held: The tribunal had been correct to construct an hypothetical . .
See Also – The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Vento EAT 19-Oct-2001
EAT Sex Discrimination – Victimisation . .
Appeal from – The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Vento EAT 4-Dec-2001
EAT Sex Discrimination – Direct . .
Cited – Campion v Hanworthy Engineering Ltd CA 1987
The Court discussed the scope of the hearing in the Court of Appeal in an employment case. . .
Cited – Walls Meat Company Limited v Selby CA 1989
The court upheld an Industrial Tribunal decision that the dismissal of the employee was unfair where the employer failed to enter into any further consultation with the union or the employee after it had prepared a list of names of employees . .
Cited – Bedfordshire Police v Liversidge CA 24-May-2002
. .
Cited – Ministry of Defence v Cannock and Others EAT 2-Aug-1994
Compensation awarded for a pregnancy dismissal was to assume that the worker would ready to work again after six months. Review and guidelines of damages for unfair dismissal for pregnancy. The hypothetical question requires careful thought before . .
Cited – Johnson v HM Prison Service and Others EAT 31-Dec-1996
Awards of damages for race discrimination were proper against both the employer, and an individual racist employee. 28k was not too much. Aggravated damages might be appropriate for direct discrimination where a complainant relied upon malice of . .
Cited – Heil v Rankin CA 13-Jun-2000
Where supervening events might contribute to the personal injury suffered, the proper approach in apportioning compensation in respect of one occasion was in general terms to provide just and sufficient compensation for the injury caused without . .
Cited – Alexander v Home Office CA 1988
Prisoners are a section of the public for the purposes of the 1976 Act. The Court increased an award for injury to feelings awarded for race discrimination by prison officers from pounds 50 to pounds 500. The court considered the appropriate level . .
Cited – Gbaja-Biamila v DHL International (UK) Ltd and others EAT 1-Mar-2000
EAT Race Discrimination – Injury to Feelings
EAT Race Discrimination – Injury to feelings. . .
Cited – North West Thames Regional Health Authority v Noone CA 1988
The question of whether an employer has acted in a racially discriminatory is to be concluded not as a matter of law, but from his behaviour and almost as a matter of common sense.
May LJ said: ‘As there is not often direct evidence of . .

Cited by:

Cited – British Telecommunications plc v Reid CA 6-Oct-2003
The respondent appealed an award of pounds 10.000 for damages for an act of direct race discrimination. The claimant, of Afro-Caribbean origin, had been subjected to a racist comment.
Held: Translating hurt feelings into hard currency will . .
Cited – Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council CA 11-Feb-2004
Compensation for non-economic loss brought about by the manner of an unfair dismissal is, on authority and on principle, recoverable. The award of such compensation by the employment tribunal in the present case was not excessive and was adequately . .
Cited – Scott v Inland Revenue CA 2-Apr-2004
The employee had claimed damages for unfair dismissal. The Revenue had subsequently changed its policy on retirement, but did not disclose this to the claimant. The change would have altered the calculation of the damages.
Held: A calculation . .
Cited – Lambe v 186K Ltd CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been dismissed for redundancy, but the company had been found not to have consulted him properly, and he had therefore been unfairly dismissed. The tribunal had then found that even if consulted the result would not have been . .
Cited – KD v Chief Constable of Hampshire QBD 23-Nov-2005
The claimant’s daughter had made a complaint of rape. She alleged that she was sexually harassed by the investigating police officer, and sought damages also from the defendant, his employer. The officer denied that anything improper or . .
Cited – Miles v Gilbank CA 11-May-2006
The employee claimed she had been bullied by her manager after she became pregnant. She sought damages both from the employer and from the manager personally.
Held: The manageress was personally liable. The scheme for sex based discrimination . .
Cited – Martins v Choudhary CA 20-Dec-2007
The appellant appealed the award of damages for personal injury and harrassment. He was said to have driven the claimant off the road and to have made racist remarks. He had previously been found to be in contempt of court for breaches of . .
Cited – Abegaze v Shrewsbury College of Arts and Technology CA 20-Feb-2009
In 2000 the claimant succeeded in his claim for discrimination, but had not pursued his remedy. He now appealed against a refusal to allow him to take it further. He had initially failed to pursue the matter for ill health. He later refused to . .
Cited – Ministry of Defence v Fletcher EAT 9-Oct-2009
mod_fletcherEAT2009
EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION
Injury to feelings
SEXUAL ORIENTATION DISCRIMINATION
Where there is overlap between the basis of aggravated damages and compensation for injury to feelings, double counting . .
Cited – Chagger v Abbey National Plc and Another CA 13-Nov-2009
The claimant appealed against the limitation of 2% placed on the uplift of his award of damages for having failed to comply with relevant dispute procedures. The tribunal had found exceptional reasons for reducing the uplift given the size of the . .
Cited – Milner and Another v Carnival Plc (T/A Cunard) CA 20-Apr-2010
Damages for Disastrous Cruise
The claimants had gone on a cruise organised by the defendants. It was described by them as ‘the trip of a lifetime.’ It did not meet their expectations. There had been several complaints, including that the cabin was noisy as the floor flexed with . .
Cited – Wardle v Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank CA 11-May-2011
The claimant had been found to have been unlawfully dismissed and to have suffered nationality discrimination. Each party appealed against aspects of the compensatory award including the application of the statutory uplift, and the calculation of . .
Cited – Cairns v Modi CA 31-Oct-2012
Three appeals against the levels of damages awards were heard together, and the court considered the principles to be applied.
Held: In assessing compensation following a libel, the essential question was how much loss and damage did the . .
Cited – Ministry of Defence v Kemeh EAT 11-Mar-2013
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS- Agency relationships
RACE DISCRIMINATION
Direct
Injury to feelings
Accepted, in line with EAT authority, that common law agency principles apply to Race Relations . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178542

Douglas McFarlane v Shell (UK) Ltd: EAT 20 Nov 2002

EAT The tribunal asked whether the claimant was disabled within the Act. He suffered depression, but the tribunal had found it not substantial and not capable of lasting more than 12 months.
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability.

Judges:

The Honourable Lord Johnston

Citations:

EATS/0016/02, [2002] UKEAT 0016 – 02 – 2011

Links:

Bailii, EAT

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995 1

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178504

Bruce v Dignity Funerals Ltd (Formerly SCI Funerals Ltd): EAT 22 Nov 2002

Judges:

The Honourable Lord Johnston

Citations:

EATS/0015/02, [2002] UKEAT 0015 – 02 – 2211

Links:

Bailii, EAT

Statutes:

Employment Rights Act 1996 123(1)

Citing:

Mentioned – Edwards v The Governors of Hanson School EAT 11-Jan-2001
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Procedural fairness/automatically unfair dismissal. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Dignity Funerals Limited v Bruce OHCS 14-Oct-2004
The employee was found to have been unfairly dismissed. The employer appealed the compensatory award which was based on his depressive illness. They said that the illness predated the dismissal.
Held: The EAT’s decision was set aside. In . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Scotland, Damages

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178501

Hendricks v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 27 Nov 2002

The appellant appealed a finding of the Employment Appeal Tribunal against her. She had complained of sex and race discrimination. She alleged that the Tribunal had concentrated on the issues of policy within the respondent police force.
Held: The true issues were how in fact the complainant had been treated, and the Tribunal had concentrated too much on what were the policies of the Respondent. Attempts should be made to concentrate on the most recent and most serious allegations to limit the scope of the hearings.

Judges:

Judge, Mummery, May LJJ

Citations:

Times 06-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1686, [2003] IRLR 96, [2003] 1 All ER 654, [2002] All ER (D) 407, [2003] ICR 530

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Hendricks EAT 5-Nov-2001
EAT Jurisdiction – (no sub-topic). . .
Cited – Owusu v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority EAT 1-Mar-1995
The employee complained of his employer’s repeated failure to regrade him, and alleged discrimination. The employer said his claim was out of time.
Held: Mummery J made the distinction between single acts of discrimination, and continuing . .

Cited by:

Cited – Chief Constable of Kent County Constabulary v Baskerville CA 3-Sep-2003
The claimant sought damages for sex discrimination by fellow police officers in an action against the Chief Constable. The Chief Constable said he was liable for the unlawful acts of fellow officers.
Held: Anything done by an employee was done . .
Cited – James v Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd CA 23-Oct-2008
The claimant renewed his application for leave to appeal.
Held: The claimant’s first ground was unarguable. His original application failed to comply with the requirements of the 2002 Act. On the second ground, the tribunal had disagreed with . .
Cited – Arthur v London Eastern Railway Ltd (T/A One Stansted Express) CA 25-Oct-2006
The claimant brought a claim for detriment suffered after he had made a protected disclosure. The employer replied that he was out of the three month time limit. He had been off sick after being assaulted, and said that his employers had treated him . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Police, Employment

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178476

Archibald v Fife Council: EAT 12 Dec 2002

EAT Disability Discrimination – Adjustments
EAT Disability Discrimination – Reasonable adjustments.

Judges:

The Honourable Lord Johnston

Citations:

EATS/0025/02, [2002] UKEAT 0025 – 02 – 1212

Links:

Bailii, EAT

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Appeal from – Archibald v Fife Council IHCS 9-Dec-2003
The applicant was a roadsweeper. She complained of disability discrimination, when after becoming unable to walk, her employer after considering her for other posts dismissed her for incapacity.
Held: The ability to walk was a part of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178563

A Power v Panasonic UK Ltd: EAT 17 Sep 2002

EAT The tribunal had held that the applicant was not a disabled person within the meaning of the Act because only of an addiction to alcohol. This was not to be treated as an impairment. She also suffered from depression.
Held: The tribunal should have determined whether the depression constituted an impairment within the meaning of the Act without inquiring into its cause. ‘Further, in our judgment, the employment tribunal erred in its approach, as evidenced in the last sentence of paragraph 24 of its decision. It is not material to a decision as to whether a person is suffering a disability within the meaning of the Act, to consider how the impairment from which they are suffering was caused. What is material is to ascertain whether the disability from which they are suffering at the material time is a disability within the meaning of the Act or whether, where it is relevant as in this case, it is an impairment which is excluded by reason of the Regulations from being treated as such a disability.’

Judges:

Ms Recorder Slade QC

Citations:

EAT/747/01, [2003] IRLR 151, [2002] UKEAT 747 – 01 – 1709

Links:

Bailii, EATn

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Power v Panasonic UK Ltd EAT 24-Jan-2002
. .

Cited by:

Followed – Hutchison 3G UK Ltd v Mason EAT 1-Jul-2003
EAT A cocaine addict who suffered from clinical depression claimed discrimination on the ground of disability.
Held: There was expert medical evidence before the employment tribunal which had entitled it to . .
Cited – Council of the City of Manchester v Romano, Samariz CA 1-Jul-2004
The authority sought to evict their tenant on the ground that he was behaving in a way which was a nuisance to neighbours. The tenant was disabled, and claimed discrimination.
Held: In secure tenancies, the authority had to consider the . .
Cited – London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm and Disability Rights Commission CA 25-Jul-2007
The court was asked, whether asked to grant possession against a disabled tenant where the grounds for possession were mandatory. The defendant was a secure tenant with a history of psychiatric disability. He had set out to buy his flat, but the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Employment

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178225