EAT Sex Discrimination – INJURY TO FEELINGS AWARD
Appeal allowed and – the Appellant consenting to this approach – the sum of andpound;6,000 substituted as the award for injury to feelings in place of the Employment Tribunal’s award of andpound;12,000.
Recognising that that Employment Tribunal was best placed to assess the injury to feelings in any particular case and should be permitted a considerable margin in carrying out this assessment; awards for injury to feelings generally would not be susceptible on appeal unless manifestly excessive or wrong in principle.
That said, in a case where the Claimant had put the level of award she was seeking under this head as falling towards the upper end of the lowest band in Vento (No 2), whilst the Tribunal was not bound by that, the Respondent was entitled to understand what factors had persuaded the Tribunal to then make an award falling in the middle band.
Awards for injury to feelings should serve to compensate for that injury and should not be used as a means of punishing respondents or deterring them from particular courses of conduct, Ministry of Defence v Cannock [1994] IRLR 509. Further, a Tribunal should not allow its feelings of indignation and outrage towards a Respondent to inflate the award, see e.g Corus Hotels plc v Woodward and Anr UKEAT/0536/05/LA.
Whilst the Reasons did not disclose an attempt to punish the Respondent, the factors referred to would seem more naturally to support an award of aggravated damages but the Tribunal had not said that this was what it was doing. Otherwise the Reasons were inadequate to support such a high award in this case. With the Appellant’s consent, it was appropriate to substitute an award of andpound;6,000, which fell at the top of the lower Vento band.
Eady QC HHJ
[2014] UKEAT 0090 – 14 – 0108
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539394