EAT Disability Discrimination : Compensation
Assessment of pension loss
1. The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in declining to discount the award of pension loss to take into account the chance that the Claimant would obtain work as a teacher and thereby gain access to a final salary pension scheme again. It was entitled to find that there was no realistic chance that the Claimant would obtain such work. Abbey National plc v Chagger [2010] ICR 397, Thornett v Scope [2007] ICR 236 and Eversheds Legal Services v De Belin [2011] ICR 1137 considered.
2. The Employment Tribunal erred in law in the way in which it calculated the Claimant’s pension loss from the age of 52 to 60. Chief Constable of the Metropolitan Police v Gardner UKEAT/0174/11 and Griffin v Plymouth Hospital NHS Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1240 considered.
3. The Employment Tribunal erred in law by discounting the Claimant’s pension loss from the age of 60 onwards for accelerated payment: it had already adopted tables for the multiplier which took accelerated payment into account.
4. The Employment Tribunal erred in law in ‘grossing up’ the award of compensation for loss of pension when it had used gross figures for assessing that loss. However, it was correct to proceed on the basis that the award of compensation for loss of pension would be taxed under Part 6, Chapter 3 of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003: Yorkshire Housing Limited v Cuerden [2010] UKEAT/0397/09 followed.
5. The Respondent sought to ‘renew’ at the Full Hearing a ground of appeal which had been rejected under Rule 3(7). It had made no application under Rule 3(10) and was long out of time for doing so. It was not entitled to renew a ground of appeal in this way.
David Richardson HHJ
[2015] UKEAT 0027 – 15 – 0909
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.552079