EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosure
The issue was whether a complaint under section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 had been presented in time. The employment judge ruled that that issue should be decided when the Claimant’s other claims were considered on their merits, because evidence was required to decide whether the various detriments to which the Claimant had allegedly been subjected formed part of a series of similar acts or failures within the meaning of section 48(3)(a). The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed an appeal against that ruling on the ground that no evidence was required to resolve that issue, since the latest detriment (which could not be regarded as a continuing act) had not occurred within three months of the date of the presentation of the complaint, and accordingly the question whether there was a link between the latest detriment and earlier detriments did not arise.
Judges:
Keith J
Citations:
[2011] UKEAT 0129 – 11 – 0107
Links:
Statutes:
Employment Rights Act 1996 47B
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441463
