EAT The employer appealed against a finding of unfair dsmissal and unlawful disability discrimination. He claimant suffered post traumatic stress after a fire at the appellant’s premises, and the employer was advised to remove him from safety critical positions. They made attempts to find alternate work, but the claimant said the attempts were inadequate, and the tribunal agreed.
Held: Where the potential for alternative employment lay for practical purposes exclusively within the knowledge of the employer, the burden of proof is on the employer to satisfy the tribunal that there was no alternative employment, available in the reasonably acceptable future for this employee. The company had not discharged this burden, and their appeal failed.
Judges:
His Honour Judge Collins Cbe
Citations:
EAT/83/00, [2001] UKEAT 83 – 00 – 3001
Links:
Statutes:
Disability Discrimination Act 1995 5(1) 6
Citing:
See Also – Conoco Ltd v Booth EAT 6-Apr-2000
The EAT held a preliminary hearing on the employer’s appeal against a finding of disability discrimination. . .
Cited – Goodwin v Patent Office EAT 21-Oct-1998
An ability to carry out normal domestic day to day tasks did not mean that a physical impairment was not substantial. The word ‘substantial’ is potentially ambiguous. In that it might mean ‘very large’ or ‘more than minor or trivial’. The code of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination, Employment
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172011
