Click the case name for better results:

ADT Fire and Security Plc v Speyer: EAT 15 Sep 2006

EAT Unfair dismissal and Race Relations Act 1976 Unfair dismissal – Exclusions including worker/jurisdiction Three cases were stayed pending the judgment of the House of Lords in Lawson v Serco [2006] ICR 250. The appeal in the British Council case was dismissed on withdrawal after the hearing and before the judgment. In ADT, the Employment … Continue reading ADT Fire and Security Plc v Speyer: EAT 15 Sep 2006

Bwllfa and Merthyr Dare Steam Collieries (1891) Ltd v Pontypridd Waterworks Co: HL 1903

A coalmine owner claimed statutory compensation against a water undertaking which had, under its statutory authority, prevented him mining his coal over a period during which the price of coal had risen. The House was asked whether the coal should be valued as at the beginning of the period or at its value during the … Continue reading Bwllfa and Merthyr Dare Steam Collieries (1891) Ltd v Pontypridd Waterworks Co: HL 1903

D H Kirton v Tetrosyl Limited: CA 10 Apr 2003

The claimant suffered asymptotic prostate cancer, but after a prostatectomy, had suffered urinary incontinence. He appealed a finding of the tribunal and EAT that his condition was not a disability within the Act. Held: The Schedule enlarged upon the definition of disability to give statutory protection to those with progressive conditions. The urinary incontinece was … Continue reading D H Kirton v Tetrosyl Limited: CA 10 Apr 2003

MHC Consulting Services Ltd v Tansell: CA 19 Apr 2000

A company took on employees through an employment agency. The contract of employment was between the agency and the worker who was supplied to the company by the agency. It was the company which had relationship of principal to the worker, and so was responsible for compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act. The absence of … Continue reading MHC Consulting Services Ltd v Tansell: CA 19 Apr 2000

D G Moncrieff (Farmers) v MacDonald: EAT 1978

The ability of a tribunal to revisit its own judgments, the review procedure, was only appropriate for use in exceptional circumstances. Citations: [1978] IRLR 112 Cited by: Cited – Trimble v Supertravel Ltd EAT 1982 The Industrial Tribunal had held that the appellant’s dismissal was unfair but then decided that she had failed to mitigate … Continue reading D G Moncrieff (Farmers) v MacDonald: EAT 1978

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 hearing as a result of her representative’s shortcomings. It would not be in the interests … Continue reading Lindsay v Ironsides Ray and Vials: EAT 27 Jan 1994

Rugamel v Sony Music Entertainment UK Ltd; McNicol v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Ltd: EAT 28 Aug 2001

Both cases questioned the extent, as a disability, of functional or psychological ‘overlay’, where there may be no medical condition underlying the symptoms which the employee claims to be present. Neither claimant had asserted any psychological disability. The employees appealed a refusal that they be considered to suffer a disability. ‘Impairment’, has to mean some … Continue reading Rugamel v Sony Music Entertainment UK Ltd; McNicol v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Ltd: EAT 28 Aug 2001

O’Neill v Symm and Co Ltd: EAT 10 Jun 1998

An employer dismissing an employee for sickness absences, and who was unaware that the sickness had come to be a disability, did not discriminate under the Act. The reason for the dismissal was to be looked for in the mind of the employer. Citations: Gazette 08-Jul-1998, Gazette 10-Jun-1998, Times 12-Mar-1998, [1998] IRLR 233 Statutes: Disability … Continue reading O’Neill v Symm and Co Ltd: EAT 10 Jun 1998

Stec and Others v United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Apr 2006

(Grand Chamber) The claimants said that differences between the sexes in the payment of reduced earning allowances and retirement allowances were sex discrimination. Held: The differences were not infringing sex discrimination. The differences arose from the differences in pensionable ages for men and women introduced in 1940 in order to help remedy severe social inequalities … Continue reading Stec and Others v United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Apr 2006

Kenny v Hampshire Constabulary: EAT 22 Oct 1998

The withdrawal of a job offer to a man with cerebral palsy was not disability discrimination, where it was because of the difficulty of making the arrangements necessary to put the applicant in a position to do the work as opposed to pure work related issues. Citations: Times 22-Oct-1998, Gazette 11-Nov-1998 Statutes: Disability Discrimination Act … Continue reading Kenny v Hampshire Constabulary: EAT 22 Oct 1998

Servier Laboratories Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and others: Admn 19 Feb 2009

The claimant challenged the failure of the defendant to list its drug strontium ranelate for prescription within the UK. They said that NICE failed to act fairly and with transparency by their failure to supply or disclose to Servier and the other consultees the economic model and underlying data upon which the conclusions of NICE … Continue reading Servier Laboratories Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence and others: Admn 19 Feb 2009

Bulmer (HP) Ltd v Bollinger SA: CA 1974

The plaintiff complained that the respondent had described its drink ‘Babycham’ as a champagne perry, which it said was a misuse of the appellation ‘champagne’. Held: The court considered the effect of European legislation on the law of England and Wales. Lord Denning MR said: ‘But when we come to matters with a European element, … Continue reading Bulmer (HP) Ltd v Bollinger SA: CA 1974

Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002

Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court. Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. Tanfern was limited to appeals from … Continue reading Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC): CA 13 Nov 2002

AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable harm for the purposes of an action of damages for personal injury. Held: The insurers’ appeals failed. … Continue reading AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill (Reference By The Counsel General for Wales): SC 9 Feb 2015

The court was asked whether the Bill was within the competence of the Welsh Assembly. The Bill purported to impose NHS charges on those from whom asbestos related damages were recovered. Held: The Bill fell outside the legislative competence of the Welsh Assembly, in that it did not relate to any of the subjects listed … Continue reading Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill (Reference By The Counsel General for Wales): SC 9 Feb 2015

DA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 15 May 2019

Several lone parents challenged the benefits cap, saying that it was discriminatory. Held: (Hale, Kerr LL dissenting) The parents’ appeals failed. The legislation had a clear impact on lone parents and their children. The intention was to encourage claimants back into work. It was said that thus contradicted the other policy of providing no free … Continue reading DA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 15 May 2019

Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Morris: EAT 12 Mar 2012

EAT RACE DISCRIMINATION – Direct discriminationDISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – DisabilityDISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable AdjustmentsC, who is black, was employed by RBS. He raised a complaint against his manager (T). The manager to whom he complained (A) suggested, without any foundation in anything that C had said, that C was alleging a racial motivation on the part … Continue reading Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Morris: EAT 12 Mar 2012

JP Morgan Europe Ltd v Chweidan: EAT 26 Aug 2010

EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATIONDisability related discriminationDirect disability discriminationThe Employment Tribunal found that the Claimant, an Executive Director in Structured Credit and Sales, had not suffered disability related discrimination under s3A(1) of the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act, by reason of the fact that his disability limited his working hours and prevented him from widening his client base, … Continue reading JP Morgan Europe Ltd v Chweidan: EAT 26 Aug 2010

Medical Justice, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 26 Jul 2010

The claimant, a charity assisting immigrants and asylum seekers, challenged a policy document regulating the access to the court of failed applicants facing removal. They said that the new policy, reducing the opportunity to appeal to 72 hours or less, made ineffective any right for judicial review. Held: The request was granted, and the 2010 … Continue reading Medical Justice, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 26 Jul 2010

Pfeiffer v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV (1): ECJ 5 Oct 2004

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: Arbeitsgericht Lorrach – Germany. Social policy – Protection of the health and safety of workers – Directive 93/104/EC – Scope – Emergency workers in attendance in ambulances in the framework of an emergency service run by the German Red Cross – Definition of ‘road transport’ – Maximum weekly working … Continue reading Pfeiffer v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV (1): ECJ 5 Oct 2004

Abbey National Plc v Fairbrother: EAT 12 Jan 2007

EAT Unfair Dismissal Disability discrimination The Tribunal had found a dismissal to be unfair because of flaws in a grievance procedure, following which the Claimant had resigned. They also found that the Claimant, who suffered an obsessive compulsive disorder, was subjected to taunts that she would not have had inflicted on her if she had … Continue reading Abbey National Plc v Fairbrother: EAT 12 Jan 2007

Law Hospitals NHS Trust v Rush: SCS 13 Jun 2001

The claimant had said that the effect of her dyslexia was to inhibit her career progress. Held:It was right for a tribunal to have regard to how an applicant could carry out duties at work in deciding whether she was within the Disability Discrimination Act. Evidence of how the claimant carries out normal day-to-day activities … Continue reading Law Hospitals NHS Trust v Rush: SCS 13 Jun 2001

Marshall v The Learning Trust and Others: EAT 21 Jul 2015

EAT Practice and Procedure: Appellate Jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke Two live issues: (1) The Appellant was not permitted to run a new argument on aiding and abetting under section 57 Disability Discrimination Act 1995. (2) Having heard live evidence I found that the Appellant’s representative (her husband) had not pursued a claim for damages for wrongful dismissal at … Continue reading Marshall v The Learning Trust and Others: EAT 21 Jul 2015

Blackledge v London General Transport Services Ltd: EAT 3 Aug 2001

The appellant appealed against a finding that he was not disabled under the Act. He had been a soldier in action and many years later, he suffered flash backs and claimed post traumatic stress disorder. Doctors differed in their diagnosis, and in the standards they used, ICD-10 and DSM-IV. The tribunal failed properly to recognise … Continue reading Blackledge v London General Transport Services Ltd: EAT 3 Aug 2001

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 idea of when it would be possible for him … Continue reading Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999

British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others: EAT 26 Mar 1997

The employer appealed against a decision by the tribunal that it had jurisdiction to hear the complaints of sex discrimination. The tribunal had extended the time for the claim on the just and equitable basis. Held: The EAT set out five criteria for answering whether to extend time: ‘(a) the length of and reasons for … Continue reading British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others: EAT 26 Mar 1997

Fox v British Airways Plc (Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of Dismissal): EAT 22 Apr 2015

Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of Dismissal – DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments Unfair Dismissal – fairness of the decision to dismiss In circumstances where the advice available to the employer had materially changed between the taking of the decision to dismiss and the dismissal itself, a question arose as to whether this impacted upon the fairness … Continue reading Fox v British Airways Plc (Unfair Dismissal: Reasonableness of Dismissal): EAT 22 Apr 2015

The Department for Work and Pensions v Conyers: EAT 5 Nov 2014

EAT Disability Discrimination: Disability – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Perversity – Disability – whether evidence to support finding – The Claimant had two periods of absence during the latter part of her employment. She had conceded in her witness statement and evidence that she was not a disabled person for the purposes of the Disability … Continue reading The Department for Work and Pensions v Conyers: EAT 5 Nov 2014

General Dynamics Information Technology Ltd v Carranza: EAT 10 Oct 2014

EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal The Employment Tribunal, by a majority, found that the Respondent was in breach of a duty to make reasonable adjustments for the Claimant because it would have been a reasonable adjustment to disregard a final written warning. Held: (1) The majority had been … Continue reading General Dynamics Information Technology Ltd v Carranza: EAT 10 Oct 2014

McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: CA 13 Oct 2010

The claimant said that the wihdrawal of overnight support to her at home was unlawful. Held: The claim failed. Her requirement was a need to urinate safely at night, which was satisfied by the new arrangement. Rix, Wilson LJJ, Sir David Keene [2010] EWCA Civ 1109, (2010) 13 CCL Rep 664, [2011] ACD 40 Bailii … Continue reading McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: CA 13 Oct 2010

Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council v Norton and Others: CA 21 Jul 2011

Appeal from possession order – house occupied by school caretaker. Maurice Kay VP, Carnwath, Lloyf LJJ [2011] EWCA Civ 834, [2011] Eq LR 1167, [2011] HLR 46, [2011] NPC 79, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 617, [2011] 30 EG 57, [2012] PTSR 56 Bailii Disability Discrimination Act 1995 49A, European Convention on Human Rights 8, Human … Continue reading Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council v Norton and Others: CA 21 Jul 2011

Gallop v Newport City Council: CA 11 Dec 2013

An employer was not absolutely bound by the views of an Occupational Health Practitioner. Longmore, Rimer LJJ, Sir John Mummery [2013] EWCA Civ 1583 Bailii Disability Discrimination Act 1995 England and Wales Citing: Leave – Gallop v Newport City Council CA 31-Jan-2013 Application for leave to appeal – allowed. . . Cited by: Cited – … Continue reading Gallop v Newport City Council: CA 11 Dec 2013

Peregrine (Deceased) v Amazon.Co.Uk Ltd (Disability Discrimination : Reasonable Adjustments): EAT 20 Aug 2013

EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments The Claimant had surgery for parotid cancer in 1998 and so was disabled under para 6A Disability Discrimination Act 1995. In 2009 he developed symptoms in his back which the treating physicians did not immediately link to the cancer. He died in 2011. The Respondent did not know, and … Continue reading Peregrine (Deceased) v Amazon.Co.Uk Ltd (Disability Discrimination : Reasonable Adjustments): EAT 20 Aug 2013

Croft Vets Ltd and Others v Butcher: EAT 2 Oct 2013

EAT Disability Discrimination : Disability Related Discrimination – Reasonable adjustments – The Respondent was employed by the Appellants as a reception and finance manager. She suffered from work-related stress and severe depression. She resigned from her employment when the Appellants did not act on the recommendations made by the clinical psychiatrist to whom they referred … Continue reading Croft Vets Ltd and Others v Butcher: EAT 2 Oct 2013

Newham Sixth Form College v Sanders: EAT 2 Jul 2013

EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustmentsThe Employment Tribunal did not apply the structured approach in Rowan and Ashton to the Claimant’s claim for reasonable adjustments, or show that it considered s.4A(1) or (3) Disability Discrimination Act 1995, and did not answer a crucial question in its list of issues. The judgment and the consequential remedy … Continue reading Newham Sixth Form College v Sanders: EAT 2 Jul 2013

SCA Packaging Ltd v Boyle (Northern Ireland): HL 1 Jul 2009

The claimant suffered a condition which would lead to the development of vocal nodules unless she followed a program which would allow her to avoid raising her voice. She said that employer should not have placed her within a noisy environment. The employer appealed against a decision that she suffered a disability saying that she … Continue reading SCA Packaging Ltd v Boyle (Northern Ireland): HL 1 Jul 2009

Salford NHS Primary Care Trust v Smith: EAT 26 Aug 2011

salfordnhs_smithEAT2011 EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION ACTThe Claimant was a physiotherapist employed by the Respondent in a managerial position. At the relevant time she was on long term sick leave because she suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome. She was signed off work by her GP and was unable to return to her post or perform any productive … Continue reading Salford NHS Primary Care Trust v Smith: EAT 26 Aug 2011

Barber v London Borough of Croydon: CA 11 Feb 2010

The tenant who suffered learning and behavioural difficulties appealed against an order for possession of his council flat. He had become aggressive with the caretaker. The council sought possession, and he defended the claim saying that the council had failed to take account of his disability. Held: The applicable national guidance required the council to … Continue reading Barber v London Borough of Croydon: CA 11 Feb 2010

X v Y Ltd (Practice and Procedure – Disclosure): EAT 9 Aug 2018

Iniquity surpasses legal advice privilege PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disclosure PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal An Employment Judge struck out paragraphs of the Claimant’s claim as they depended on an email in respect of which legal advice privilege was claimed. In considering whether privilege could not be claimed as the advice in the email was … Continue reading X v Y Ltd (Practice and Procedure – Disclosure): EAT 9 Aug 2018

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 council sought possession when it discovered that he had sublet. Held: Section 23(3)(c) … Continue reading London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm and Disability Rights Commission: CA 25 Jul 2007

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 after their primary discrimination claims. Held: The 1975 and 1976 Acts were similarly phrased and the wording in the 1995 … Continue reading 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

Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 1): HL 3 Mar 1993

Questions on pregnancy dismissals included unavailability at required time. The correct comparison under the Act of 1975 was between the pregnant woman and: ‘a hypothetical man who would also be unavailable at the critical time. The relevant circumstance for the purposes of the comparison required by section 5(3) to be made is expected unavailability at … Continue reading Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 1): HL 3 Mar 1993

Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy. Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law because it is the antithesis of fairness. It brings the law … Continue reading Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

Barlow v P Stone: EAT 1 Jun 2012

barlow_stoneEAT2012 EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Aiding and abettingThe Tribunal erred in concluding that it had no jurisdiction to consider a claim of victimisation brought by an employee against a fellow employee under Part II of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. In the circumstances it had: see section 17A(1)(b), section 57(1) and (2) and section 58(1) … Continue reading Barlow v P Stone: EAT 1 Jun 2012

Igen Ltd v Wong: CA 18 Feb 2005

Proving Discrimination – Two Stage Process Each appeal raised procedural issues in discrimination cases, asking where, under the new regulations, the burden of proof had shifted. Held: The new situation required a two stage process before a complaint could be upheld. First the claimant had to establish facts allowing the tribunal to conclude, in the … Continue reading Igen Ltd v Wong: CA 18 Feb 2005

Thomas-Ashley v Drum Housing Association Ltd: CA 17 Mar 2010

The tenant had been ordered to leave her flat. She had kept a dog in breach of her tenancy agreement. The landlord had terminated the assured shorthold tenancy by a section 21 notice. She said that they had failed to make reasonable adjustments to allow for her disability, and that the dog was critical to … Continue reading Thomas-Ashley v Drum Housing Association Ltd: CA 17 Mar 2010

Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 2): HL 20 Oct 1995

The applicant complained that she was dismissed when her employers learned that she was pregnant. Held: 1(1) (a) and 5(3) of the 1975 Act were to be interpreted as meaning that where a woman had been engaged for an indefinite period, the fact that pregnancy was the reason for her temporary unavailability at a time … Continue reading Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 2): HL 20 Oct 1995

McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 6 Jul 2011

The claimant, a former prima ballerina, had suffered injury as she grew old. She came to suffer a condition requiring her to urinate at several points during each night. The respondent had been providing a carer to stay with her each night to provide the assistance neceesary to access the commode. The claimant now appealed … Continue reading McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 6 Jul 2011

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 discrimination: ‘the tribunal erred in law in failing to treat the acts complained of on regrading and failure to … Continue reading Owusu v London Fire and Civil Defence Authority: EAT 1 Mar 1995

Pieretti v London Borough of Enfield: CA 12 Oct 2010

The claimant sought a declaration that the duty set out in the 1995 Act applies to the discharge of duties, and to the exercise of powers, by local housing authorities under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 being the part entitled ‘Homelessness’. The defendant argued that (1) the section concerned only the general formulation … Continue reading Pieretti v London Borough of Enfield: CA 12 Oct 2010

Noor v UK Border Agency (UKBA): EAT 30 Jul 2012

noor_ukbaEAT2012 EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Extension of time: just and equitableDISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – DisabilityPRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Preliminary issuesThe Claimant contended he had been discriminated against and victimised on account of his disability in a long sequence of events. The Respondent acknowledged there was proximity between all of the events and for that reason sought … Continue reading Noor v UK Border Agency (UKBA): EAT 30 Jul 2012

Council of The City of Newcastle Upon Tyne v Marsden (Rev 1): EAT 23 Jan 2010

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Review Claim under Disability Discrimination Act 1995 dismissed at PHR because Claimant not available to give evidence as to long-term effect of injury – Judge willing to offer adjournment if absence of Claimant had been explained and adjournment applied for – Counsel tells Judge that he does not know reason … Continue reading Council of The City of Newcastle Upon Tyne v Marsden (Rev 1): EAT 23 Jan 2010

McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College: EAT 13 Jul 2007

EAT Disability discrimination – DisabilityCompulsory admission of a patient under the Mental Health Act is not automatically a disability under the DDA 1995. In the circumstances of this case the severity of the Claimant’s condition did mean she had an impairment with a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities.In determining whether or not a condition … Continue reading McDougall v Richmond Adult Community College: EAT 13 Jul 2007

Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd: HL 16 Mar 1989

The twelve applicants had been unfairly dismissed by the transferor immediately before the transfer, and for a reason connected with the transfer under section 8(1). The question was whether the liability for unfair dismissal compensation transferred to the transferee. Held: It is the duty of a UK court to construe a statute, so far as … Continue reading Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd: HL 16 Mar 1989

Brown, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 18 Dec 2008

Having ‘due regard’ is not Obligation to do The claimant sought to challenge the decision to close her local post office on the basis that being retired and disabled and without a car in a rural area, the office was essential and the decision unsupportable. In particular she challenged the removal of post offices from … Continue reading Brown, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 18 Dec 2008

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 the employer shall not without reasonable and proper cause conduct itself in … Continue reading Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International: HL 12 Jun 1997

X v Mid Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau and Another: SC 12 Dec 2012

The appellant was disabled, had legal qualifications, and worked with the respondent as a volunteer. She had sought assistance under the Disability Discrimination Act, now the 2012 Act, saying that she counted as a worker. The tribunal and CA had found no contractual relationship. She said that under the 2000 Directive (the Framework Directive ‘FD’) … Continue reading X v Mid Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau and Another: SC 12 Dec 2012

British Aerospace plc v Green and Others: CA 18 Apr 1995

The employer was to make 530 members of its staff redundant. Each staff member was assessed and scored. The claimants said that the method of selection was unfair, and sought disclosure of the scores of all employees. Held: It was wrong to order discovery of the forms of employees who had not been selected for … Continue reading British Aerospace plc v Green and Others: CA 18 Apr 1995

Roberts v North West Ambulance Service: EAT 24 Jan 2011

roberts_nwasEAT2012 EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustmentsThe Tribunal misapplied section 4A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 by holding that the provision, criterion or practice in question was not applied to the Claimant, and therefore that no duty was owed to him under section 4A. The Tribunal should have followed the statutory wording and asked … Continue reading Roberts v North West Ambulance Service: EAT 24 Jan 2011

Post Office v Jones: CA 5 Jun 2001

The employee had become diabetic. Upon his coming to require insulin, the employer undertook a new risk assessment, and restricted his duties as a driver. He claimed disability discrimination. At the tribunal, both employer and employee brought medical evidence. Held: The employer’s duties under the Act had to be seen in the context of the … Continue reading Post Office v Jones: CA 5 Jun 2001

Robertson v Bexley Community Centre: CA 11 Mar 2003

The claimant brought his claim in discrimination, but it was out of time. The employer appealed against a decision to extend the time for him to file his complaint. Held: A tribunal has a very wide discretion in the area of whether to extend time for a complaint of race or sex discrimination to be … Continue reading Robertson v Bexley Community Centre: CA 11 Mar 2003

Richmond Adult Community College v McDougall: CA 17 Jan 2008

The claimant had been offered and had accepted a job subject to satisfactory health clearance. When that was not received her offer was withdrawn. She had suffered a condition which would affect her daily activities, but had recovered from that condition. She appealed against refusal of her claim for disability discrimination. The evidence suggested that … Continue reading Richmond Adult Community College v McDougall: CA 17 Jan 2008

Stockton on Tees Borough Council v Aylott: EAT 11 Mar 2009

EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS Extension of time: just and equitable2002 Act and pre-action requirements DISABILITY DISCRIMINATIONDisability related discrimination Direct disability discriminationReasonable adjustmentsExclusions/jurisdictionsVICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION: Detriment HARASSMENT: ConductThis case raises issues of legal and practical importance for discrimination cases. It is one of a number of cases in which the Employment Appeal Tribunal is considering whether the judgment … Continue reading Stockton on Tees Borough Council v Aylott: EAT 11 Mar 2009

J v DLA Piper UK Llp: EAT 15 Jun 2010

EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – DisabilityJob offer to Claimant withdrawn allegedly as a result of her disclosing a history of depression – On a preliminary issue Tribunal holds that at the material time (June 2008) Claimant not suffering from ‘clinical depression’ amounting to a disability within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.Appeal allowed, and … Continue reading J v DLA Piper UK Llp: EAT 15 Jun 2010

Shaw and Co Solicitors v Atkins: EAT 11 Feb 2009

EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Reasonable adjustmentsDISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Disability related discriminationThe Claimant suffered from ME. The Tribunal found disability discrimination in that her employer had failed to make reasonable adjustments in that (1) over a short period it had failed to offer her the adjusted hours of work she wanted; (2) it had not installed a stair … Continue reading Shaw and Co Solicitors v Atkins: EAT 11 Feb 2009

Tameside Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Mylott: EAT 11 Mar 2011

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – S. 98A (2) Employment Rights Act DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability related discrimination DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Compensation Claimant goes off sick following incident of alleged offensive behaviour by manager – Existing mental health difficulties exacerbated – Employers fail, despite recommendation from occupational health department, to carry out … Continue reading Tameside Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Mylott: EAT 11 Mar 2011

Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA: ECJ 13 Nov 1990

Sympathetic construction of national legislation LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC Directive designed to protect companies and third parties from the adverse effects of the doctrine of nullity. … Continue reading Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA: ECJ 13 Nov 1990

Matuszowicz v Kingston Upon Hull City Council: CA 10 Feb 2009

The appellant was employed as a teacher. He became disabled on losing part of his arm. He had been located at a prison and was unable to manage the heavy doors. He complained that the respondent had not made reasonable adjustments by transferring him to other work. The respondent argued and the EAT agreed that … Continue reading Matuszowicz v Kingston Upon Hull City Council: CA 10 Feb 2009

Meek v City of Birmingham District Council: CA 18 Feb 1987

Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised. Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an Industrial Tribunal is not … Continue reading Meek v City of Birmingham District Council: CA 18 Feb 1987

The Prince’s Trust v Donelan (Disability Discrimination : Disability Related Discrimination): EAT 14 Mar 2013

EAT Disability Discrimination : Disability Related DiscriminationThe Respondent employer appealed against the findings of the Employment Tribunal that the Claimant had been subject to disability related discrimination and harassment. The principal ground of appeal was that the ET failed to appreciate the full impact of London Borough of Lewisham (2008) on the need for a … Continue reading The Prince’s Trust v Donelan (Disability Discrimination : Disability Related Discrimination): EAT 14 Mar 2013

Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham and Others (Practice and Procedure : Costs): EAT 6 Jun 2013

EAT Practice and Procedure : Costs – Tribunal orders that Appellant should pay Respondents one-third of their costs (estimated prior to assessment at andpound;260,000) on the basis that the claim was misconceived from the start.Held, dismissing the appeal, that there was no error of law in the Tribunal’s approach – In particular, it was not … Continue reading Vaughan v London Borough of Lewisham and Others (Practice and Procedure : Costs): EAT 6 Jun 2013

Photis v Bruce, v KMC International Search and Selection, The Department of Trade and Industry, KMC International Search and Selection, The Department of Trade and Industry, the Lord Chancellor’s Department: EAT 6 Dec 2001

The case concerned the applicability of the race and disability discrimination law to appointments to statutory offices, particularly as to whether any remedy was provided for infringement. It was suggested that such appointments did not constitute . .

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Gichura v Home Office and Another: CA 20 May 2008

The claimant sought damages after his treatment as a disabled person whilst held in immigration detention centres. The court dismissed his claim on the basis of Amin. Held: The application of the Amin case was too simplistic. The various services provided at the detention centre were only to some extent purely governmental. A disabled person … Continue reading Gichura v Home Office and Another: CA 20 May 2008

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

General Medical Council v H Cox: EAT 22 Mar 2002

Miss Cox claimed that the Council had not made a proper adjustment so as to allow her to work for them despite her disability. The Council asserted as a preliminary point that they were not a trade organisation within the sections, and so were not caught by the provisions. They appealed a finding against them. … Continue reading General Medical Council v H Cox: EAT 22 Mar 2002

X v Mid Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau and Another: EAT 30 Oct 2009

EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Exclusions/jurisdictionsThe Employment Judge did not err in finding that the Appellant, a volunteer worker with the CAB, was not entitled by the DDA to claim disability discrimination. The Government is not in breach of the Framework Directive in this regard, and s4(2)(d) and s68 of the DDA do not fall to be … Continue reading X v Mid Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau and Another: EAT 30 Oct 2009

O’Hanlon v Revenue and Customs: CA 30 Mar 2007

The claimant suffered depression, and complained that the respondent’s reduction in her pay after long periods of sickness was discriminatory. She appealed decisions that it was not. She said that a reasonable adjustment would have been to continue her sick pay unreduced. Held: The claim was unrealistic since it did not recognise the effect of … Continue reading O’Hanlon v Revenue and Customs: CA 30 Mar 2007

Countrywide Estate Agents (Unlimited) and Another v Rice: EAT 26 Nov 2008

EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION Disability related discrimination Direct disability discrimination The Employment Tribunal confused the relevant tests for disability discrimination under s.3A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as amended. Case remitted to the Employment Tribunal to consider the issue of disability discrimination in the light of the judgment and London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm … Continue reading Countrywide Estate Agents (Unlimited) and Another v Rice: EAT 26 Nov 2008