A employed R as night manager at his hotel. R was a Nigerian but had permission to work in the UK. A paid R less than the minimum wage on the basis that he was vulnerable. When R sought to obtain a NI number A first tried to discourage him and then dismissed him. Was the ET entitled to find race discrimination and (if so) was it entitled to make the awards it did?
|
DDA 1995 and Risk Assessments: In Spence v Intype Libra Ltd, the EAT held that an employer's failure to make an assessment of a disabled employee does not amount to a failure to make a reasonable adjustment. The EAT gave leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal.
|
Discussions protected by Without Prejudice: In Framlington Group v Barnetson, the Court of Appeal held that discussion between an employer and an employee negotiating terms of early departure in circumstances were no litigation had been threatened were covered by the without prejudice rule. The Court of Appeal emphasised the desirability of allowing parties to settle prospective litigation and emphasised that the crucial question was whether in the course of negotiations the parties contemplated ...
|
Appeal on the grounds that the Employment Tribunal had not applied the correct statutory tests of causation under s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996 and s.4(1) Sex Discrimination Act 1975 upheld. The Employment Tribunal erred in finding only a causation link and failed to apply the statutory tests in each case. Case remitted to the same Employment Tribunal to apply the correct statutory tests in the light of its findings of fact.
|
Unlawful deductions case. It depended on the contractual right of certain shift workers. They alleged that they had rights incorporated into their contracts from a Collective Agreement. Was the Collective Agreement finalised before the employers indicated an unwillingness to apply its terms? Or had the employers withdrawn the offer before acceptance? EAT held, reversing the Employment Tribunal, that the offer had been withdrawn and that there was no contractual right to payment.
|
Contract of Employment - Definition of employee
Employment tribunal concluded in the particular circumstances of the case that an agency supplying workers to a third party had entered into contracts of employment with those workers. The EAT held that this was a conclusion the Chairman was entitled to reach. Whilst it will no doubt be an exceptional case where such a finding can properly be made, the fact that it is the end user and not the agency which exercises control over the actual operation of the work does not, as a matter of law, preve ...
|
Appeal from a PHR by a Chairman that there had been no statutory grievance following Canary Wharf Management Ltd v Edebi [2006] IRLR 416. The EAT held the test was a permissible option open to the Chairman on the facts of the case. Furthermore the Chairman was correct to hold that as there was no statutory grievance raised the ET had no power to extend time under s.111 ERA or s.76(5) SDA following London Borough of Hounslow v Mr A Millen (UKEAT/0645/06).
|
Practice and Procedure - Case Management
The parties in a claim under the Disability Discrimination Act agreed to instruct a joint orthopaedic expert. He concluded that there was an organic condition although he was unable to state the cause. After they had asked questions of the expert which did not satisfy them, the Respondents sought permission to have the Claimant examined by and to call their own expert. The ET Chairman refused permission, saying that it was not necessary under the DDA to establish the cause of an organic conditio ...
|
Disability Discrimination - Less favourable treatment
The Claimant was disabled by dyslexia. He was a train conductor. He turned up late for work on a number of occasions, finally within three weeks of a final warning; he was dismissed. The Tribunal dismissed his disability discrimination claims and found the dismissal to have been fair. Held on appeal: (1) Assuming that issue estoppel could be raised as between a preliminary decision that the Claimant was disabled and the subsequent substantive decision although the findings at the preliminary ...
|
Where in a redundancy situation volunteers are called for, apply and are accepted, the ET was not wrong in law to conclude as a matter of fact that they were prepared to be dismissed. This conclusion was for the purpose of deciding whether the Respondent was prepared to dismiss 20 relevant employees thus triggering the statutory consultation delegations.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |