The No 8 Partnership v Maxine Simmons

The No 8 Partnership v Maxine Simmons

The Employment Tribunal erred in law and procedure by constructing hypothetical comparators without input from the parties, failed to ensure a like-for-like comparison as required by section 23 Equality Act 2010, and made a perverse finding of discrimination unsupported by its own factual findings. The Tribunal also failed to apply the correct legal test and provide adequate reasoning for breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. Accordingly, the findings of direct associative disability discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal could not stand.

Parties
Appellant: THE NO. 8 PARTNERSHIP; Respondent: MS MAXINE SIMMONS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Employment Tribunal's judgment set aside.
Legal Topics
Constructive Unfair Dismissal, Associative Disability Discrimination, Direct Discrimination, Employment Rights, Procedural Fairness
Employment Law Discrimination Law Constructive Unfair Dismissal Associative Disability Discrimination Direct Discrimination Employment Rights Procedural Fairness

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE NO. 8 PARTNERSHIP

Appellant

MS MAXINE SIMMONS

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in finding constructive unfair dismissal against the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in finding direct associative disability discrimination under section 13 Equality Act 2010.
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Tribunal adopted an unfair procedure by constructing hypothetical comparators without input from the parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law and procedure by constructing hypothetical comparators without input from the parties, failed to ensure a like-for-like comparison as required by section 23 Equality Act 2010, and made a perverse finding of discrimination unsupported by its own factual findings. The Tribunal also failed to apply the correct legal test and provide adequate reasoning for breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. Accordingly, the findings of direct associative disability discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal could not stand.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Employment Tribunal's judgment set aside.

Orders

  • The claim under section 13 Equality Act 2010 is dismissed.
  • The claim of constructive unfair dismissal is remitted to a differently constituted Employment Tribunal for re-hearing.