Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed an appeal against a disability discrimination ruling, holding that the tribunal properly applied section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 and proportionality.
RB Group was not acting as agent for RB Health when amending the LTIP rules; there was no express or implied authority or assent. The PCP requiring employment as at 18 September 2019 to benefit from amended performance conditions was a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of staff retention, and thus not unlawful indirect discrimination.
Source excerpt
The EAT allowed the employer’s appeal against findings of indirect sex discrimination and unfair dismissal, holding the tribunal’s reasoning was unsafe and procedurally unfair.
There was no procedural irregularity as the opportunity to re-examine was provided and not taken. The Employment Tribunal did not err in its assessment of the claimant's disability or the date of onset, as there was insufficient evidence of a substantial adverse effect on day-to-day activities prior to February 2019. The Tribunal's approach to causation under section 15 Equality Act 2010 was overly strict regarding medical evidence, but this did not affect the outcome as the claimant was not disabled in the relevant period and, in any event, dismissal was justified.
Source excerpt
The claims against Mr Chang and Maître Zabaldano fail because the Claimant did not prove they had the requisite knowledge of the unlawfulness or intention to injure for unlawful means conspiracy, and because the Babanaft proviso precludes tortious liability for persons outside the jurisdiction merely assisting breach of a freezing order. The Marex tort claim against Maître Zabaldano fails because he honestly believed he was entitled and obliged to act as he did, negating the necessary intention, and in any event would be justified by his professional duty to his client in the absence of the E…
Source excerpt
The requirement to be employed on 18 September 2019 to benefit from the amended LTIP terms was not a means, let alone a proportionate means, of achieving the legitimate aim of retaining staff, as those excluded by the requirement could not be retained. However, RB Group was not acting as agent for RB Health in relation to the LTIP, so neither company was liable under the Equality Act 2010.
Source excerpt
The tribunal did not err in finding that the respondent lacked actual or constructive knowledge of the specific disadvantage ('restrictive mode') suffered by the claimant, and that the recruitment process, including videoconferencing, was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The appeal was dismissed as the requirements for reasonable adjustment and discrimination arising from disability were not met on the facts.
Source excerpt
The tribunal's reasons for upholding the complaints of failure to make reasonable adjustments and disability discrimination were fundamentally deficient, failing to address essential elements such as time limits, substantial disadvantage, knowledge, and reasonable steps. The majority's findings on justification were inconsistent with earlier findings and lacked sufficient reasoning. The appeal is allowed and the complaints are remitted for fresh determination.
Source excerpt
Boohene & Ors v The Royal Parks Ltd (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 583 (24 May 2024)
The Court of Appeal held that a claim by outsourced workers over London Living Wage pay did not fall within section 41 Equality Act 2010 against the principal.
The tribunal erred in its approach to justification for indirect discrimination by focusing too heavily on the claimant's individual circumstances, failing to conduct a sufficiently critical evaluation of alternatives, and relying on speculation not supported by evidence. The finding of harassment related to race was upheld as the tribunal was entitled to find that repeated threats of disciplinary action were influenced by the claimant's nationality. The award of aggravated damages was set aside as the conduct relied upon was not sufficiently egregious and there was no finding of additional i…
Source excerpt
Explore more
