Lisk-Carew v Birmingham City Council

Lisk-Carew v Birmingham City Council

The principal and effective cause of the appellant's dismissal and resulting loss was his own misconduct, not the victimisation. The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that the loss of employment and financial loss did not flow from the act of victimisation, and the compensation for injury to feelings was adequate and just.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Ronald Lisk-Carew; Respondent/defendant: Birmingham City Council; Respondent/defendant: Dr Sonia Sharp
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Victimisation, Unfair Dismissal, Remedies, Compensation, Causation
Employment Law Discrimination Law Victimisation Unfair Dismissal Remedies Compensation Causation

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Lisk-Carew

Appellant/claimant

Birmingham City Council

Respondent/defendant

Dr Sonia Sharp

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in refusing to award compensation for loss of employment and financial loss following a finding of victimisation.
  2. 2 Whether the victimisation was a causative factor in the dismissal and resulting losses.

Ratio Decidendi

The principal and effective cause of the appellant's dismissal and resulting loss was his own misconduct, not the victimisation. The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that the loss of employment and financial loss did not flow from the act of victimisation, and the compensation for injury to feelings was adequate and just.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs to be subject to detailed assessment