Parmer v East Leicester Medical Practice: EAT 1 Mar 2011

EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION
Claimant sought to bring victimisation proceedings based on statements in witness statements served in prior discrimination claim (subsequently dismissed on jurisdictional grounds) – Judge struck claim out on the basis that the statements attracted judicial proceedings immunity (Health v Commissioner of Metropolitan Police) – Appeal on basis that the immunity does not apply to victimisation claims
Appeal dismissed – Ratio in Heath applies to all kinds of discrimination by way of victimisation – In so far as EAT suggested otherwise in Zaiwalla, it was wrong – No inconsistency with the jurisdiction to award aggravated damages in respect of conduct in the course of proceedings.

Judges:

Underhill P J

Citations:

[2011] UKEAT 0490 – 10 – 0103

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.431876