Verifone (UK) Ltd v K Zena

Verifone (UK) Ltd v K Zena

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that the claimant's dismissal and selection for redundancy were not because of her race, as there were no facts from which it could infer that a hypothetical comparator of a different race would have been treated differently. The Tribunal majority's finding of victimisation was unsafe because it failed to take into account the unanimous finding that the appeal outcome was pre-determined for reasons unrelated to the protected act; thus, the only possible outcome was dismissal of the victimisation claim.

Parties
Appellant/respondent: Verifone (UK) Ltd; Respondent/claimant: Ms K Zena
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Direct Race Discrimination, Victimisation, Burden of Proof, Unfair Dismissal
Employment Law Equality Law Direct Race Discrimination Victimisation Burden of Proof Unfair Dismissal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Verifone (UK) Ltd

Appellant/respondent

Ms K Zena

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in its approach to the burden of proof in claims of direct race discrimination and victimisation under the Equality Act 2010.
  2. 2 Whether the findings of fact supported an inference of discrimination or victimisation.
  3. 3 Whether the process and reasoning of the Employment Tribunal were perverse or inadequately reasoned.

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that the claimant's dismissal and selection for redundancy were not because of her race, as there were no facts from which it could infer that a hypothetical comparator of a different race would have been treated differently. The Tribunal majority's finding of victimisation was unsafe because it failed to take into account the unanimous finding that the appeal outcome was pre-determined for reasons unrelated to the protected act; thus, the only possible outcome was dismissal of the victimisation claim.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The Employment Tribunal majority decision on victimisation is set aside and substituted with a dismissal of the victimisation claim.
  • The cross-appeal on direct race discrimination is dismissed.