R v W: EAT 27 Jan 2016

Practice and Procedure: Appellate Jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Perversity
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disposal of appeal including remission
UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal
DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustments
Bias – perversity – inadequacy of reasons
Incorrect approach to disability discrimination/reasonable adjustments claim under sections 20 and 21 Equality Act 2010 and in approach to constructive unfair dismissal for purposes of section 95 Employment Rights Act 1996
The focus of the appeal was on the Claimant’s detailed attack on the ET’s findings of fact adverse to her; she complained that these were perverse and thus evidenced bias. In the alternative, she complained that they were inadequately reasoned.
The Claimant also complained that the ET had incorrectly approached her claims under the Equality Act 2010 and under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Held: dismissing the appeal on all grounds.
Having gone through each of the Claimant’s objections to the ET’s findings of fact/complaints of inadequate reasoning, the EAT was satisfied that the conclusions reached were not perverse: they amounted to permissible conclusions given the evidence before the ET. They were, further, adequately explained. There was no evidence of bias.
Having thus concluded that the ET’s findings of fact were not susceptible to challenge, the remaining grounds of appeal really fell away. In particular, on the disability discrimination complaint, nothing had been identified as amounting to an arguable PCP given the ET’s findings of fact. The ET had, in any event, found that the Claimant was not placed at a substantial disadvantage (against which there was no challenge). That being so, the reasonable adjustments claim necessarily fell away. As for the ET’s rejection of the Claimant’s complaint of constructive dismissal, the primary finding in this regard was that no breaches of contract had occurred. There being no challenge to that finding, there could be nothing in this ground of appeal.

Eady QC J
[2016] UKEAT 0198 – 15 – 2701
Bailii
England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 14 January 2022; Ref: scu.562527