Disability Discrimination - Disability The Employment Tribunal found as a fact that the Claimant was not disabled. That conclusion was challenged on various grounds including perversity. Appeal dismissed on the basis that there was adequate material before the Tribunal which permitted it to come to that conclusion.
|
Sex Discrimination - Jurisdiction Employment Tribunal made a finding of sex discrimination and that the employer was unable to justify it. The EAT held reasoning of Tribunal inadequate and failed to properly apply the burden of proof. The Employment Tribunal also made an order for costs when there was no basis to do so. Appeal allowed and case remitted to a fresh Tribunal. Costs order vacated.
|
Unfair Dismissal - Polkey deduction This is a case regarding unfair dismissal for redundancy by reason of non-compliance with statutory procedure. Jobs found to have genuinely disappeared, but employer found to have made no proper attempt to find alternative employment. Issue whether Claimants would have found/accepted alternative employment even if the employer had acted fairly. Tribunal declined to consider making “Polkey” deduction on basis of the inadequacy of the evidenc ...
|
Disability Discrimination - Disability related discrimination The Claimant who is a disabled man claimed that his former employer discriminated against him on grounds of disability and the claim succeeded in front of the Employment Tribunal. So in identifying the appropriate comparator, it applied the test in Clark v Novacold [1999] ICR 951 which was not followed in the later decision of the House of Lords in London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm [2008] 1 AC 1399, which was not an employm ...
|
Unfair Dismissal - Reasonableness of dismissal An Employment Tribunal erred as it focussed upon a decision made by the employer to negotiate a settlement under a procedure leading to a lesser penalty than dismissal. The procedure broke down and at a fair and reasonable hearing the disciplinary panel decided to dismiss the Claimant. The Employment Tribunal wrongly substituted its view for the employer’s in deciding the matters put against the Claimant did not justify dismissal ...
|
Transfer of Undertakings - Economic technical or organisational reason This is an appeal relating to the unfair dismissal claims of ten employees. Appeal against unfair dismissal claim dismissed. Second respondents substituted as being responsible for the payment of redundancy payments.
|
Race Discrimination - Direct This is an appeal regarding direct racial discrimination and who the correct comparator is. There was an issue regarding whether an earlier CMD ruling was misinterpreted by the Employment Tribunal at substantive hearing. The case was remitted for further consideration to the same Employment Tribunal.
|
Unfair Dismissal - Contributory fault The employers dismissed the employee after a bogus redundancy exercise, after she had knowingly taken paid holiday in excess of her holiday allowance and failed to apologise. The Tribunal found that she had been unfairly dismissed, of its own volition raised Polkey but did not raise or consider contributory fault which the employers, who were unrepresented, did not raise themselves. The Employment Tribunal, having found that there was conduct on the ...
|
Working Time Regulations - Worker The Claimant entered into a written agreement dated 1 January 2006 with Premier Groundworks Ltd (“the respondent”) to provide groundwork services. The Employment Tribunal found that the agreement was not a sham and held that the claimant was a “worker” within the meaning of Regulation 2(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 (“WTR”) and was entitled to holiday pay. The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the appeal. It h ...
|
Practice and Procedure This is an appeal regarding the Registrar's decision to grant an extension of time for the lodging of an appeal and cross appeal. The appeal was allowed to be lodged but the cross appeal dismissed.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |