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 compensation for the whole period of the incapacity. It is for the Tribunal to decide how far an employee’s losses were attributable to action taken by the employer and to arrive at a sum that is just and equitable. The Tribunal may want to consider, for example, whether the illness would have manifested itself in any event. Economic loss would be ‘loss sustained by the complainant in consequence of the dismissal insofar as that loss is attributable to action taken by the employer’, this applies as much to a constructive dismissal as to an ordinary dismissal. The Tribunal should make clear-cut findings on the cause of the illness before any question of a compensatory award could arise.
Lord Coulsfield
[1993] IRLR 517
England and Wales
Cited by:
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 – 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, Damages, Scotland
Leading Case
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.183851