EAT Race Discrimination : Direct
The Claimant’s appeal argued that the Employment Tribunal had failed to follow through the inferences that it had drawn as to the conduct of the Medical Director of the Respondent in answering the question as to why the Claimant had been dismissed. The Respondent’s appeal argued that the Employment Tribunal had drawn inferences that were not open to it on the primary facts. In rejecting both appeals the judgment of Mummery LJ in the unreported decision of the Court of Appeal in Effa v Alexandra Health Care NHS Trust (5 November 1999) was considered. In the instant case, there were primary facts supporting the inferences drawn about the conduct of the Medical Director but equally there were primary facts as to his non-involvement in the dismissal which entitled the Employment Tribunal to accept the Respondent’s explanation about why the Claimant had been dismissed, with the result that neither appeal could succeed.
Hand QC J
[2012] UKEAT 0138 – 12 – 0905
Bailii
England and Wales
Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.503542
