EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL
The Claimant’s appeal against the finding that she had not been unfairly constructively dismissed was refused on the basis of the facts found by the Employment Tribunal. The Employment Tribunal was entitled to conclude that she had not been dismissed at all, nor had she been the subject of sex or race discrimination. A complaint that the judgment failed to give adequate reasons and was not Meek compliant was also rejected on the facts.
When giving judgment Employment Tribunals are well advised to follow the guidance of Buxton LJ in Balfour Beatty Power Networks v Wilcox – [2007] IRLR 63 and recite the terms of rule 30(6) of the 2004 Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations and to indicate serially how their determination fulfils its requirements.
Serota QC
[2013] UKEAT 0348 – 12 – 2305
Bailii
Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 30(6)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd and Another v Wilcox and others CA 20-Jul-2006
Rule 30(6) of the 2004 Rules, which requires sufficient reasons, is intended to be a guide and not a straitjacket so that if it can be reasonably spelled out from a determination that what the rule requires has been provided by the Tribunal, then no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 23 November 2021; Ref: scu.517219
