Stefanko and Others v Maritime Hotel Ltd and Another (Contract of Employment : Race Discrimination): EAT 25 Sep 2018

CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Written particulars
RACE DISCRIMINATION – Direct
RACE DISCRIMINATION – Comparison
The Employment Tribunal erred in concluding that an employee who has more than one but less than two months’ service is not entitled to a section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996 statement of terms and conditions of employment. It does not follow from the flexibility afforded to an employer by section 1(2) as to when the statement of initial employment particulars CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Written particulars

RACE DISCRIMINATION – Direct

RACE DISCRIMINATION – Comparison

The Employment Tribunal erred in concluding that an employee who has more than one but less than two months’ service is not entitled to a section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996 statement of terms and conditions of employment. It does not follow from the flexibility afforded to an employer by section 1(2) as to when the statement of initial employment particulars must be provided, that there is no requirement to provide a statement if the contract ends within two months.

The Employment Tribunal’s dismissal of the Second Claimant’s claim under section 1 and refusal to make an award under section 38 Employment Act 2002 is set aside and substituted with a finding that the First Respondent was in breach of section 1. The case is remitted to a different Tribunal to calculate the award under section 38.

The Employment Tribunal erred in its approach to the Claimants’ complaints of direct race discrimination in (1) not considering whether the manner, as well as the fact of dismissal, constituted direct race discrimination; and (2) in its application of the burden of proof to the evidence in its conclusion that the fact of dismissal did not constitute direct race discrimination. The complaint of direct race discrimination in dismissal is remitted to a new Tribunal for re-hearing. be provided, that there is no requirement to provide a statement if the contract ends within two months.
The Employment Tribunal’s dismissal of the Second Claimant’s claim under section 1 and refusal to make an award under section 38 Employment Act 2002 is set aside and substituted with a finding that the First Respondent was in breach of section 1. The case is remitted to a different Tribunal to calculate the award under section 38.
The Employment Tribunal erred in its approach to the Claimants’ complaints of direct race discrimination in (1) not considering whether the manner, as well as the fact of dismissal, constituted direct race discrimination; and (2) in its application of the burden of proof to the evidence in its conclusion that the fact of dismissal did not constitute direct race discrimination. The complaint of direct race discrimination in dismissal is remitted to a new Tribunal for re-hearing.

[2018] UKEAT 0024 – 18 – 2509
Bailii
England and Wales

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 15 November 2021; Ref: scu.631853