Marks v James Lynch t/a Aylesforte Interiors (Discrimination - Disability Breach of Contract Unfair Dismissal) [2019] NIIT 09225_17IT (18 February 2019)

Marks v James Lynch t/a Aylesforte Interiors (Discrimination - Disability Breach of Contract Unfair Dismissal) [2019] NIIT 09225_17IT (18 February 2019)

The respondents did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know of the claimant's disability at the material time, so the disability discrimination claim fails. The claimant was not unfairly dismissed as he was reinstated and continued to submit sick notes, indicating acceptance of employment. Deductions from sick pay and holiday pay by the second respondent were not authorised under the relevant statutory provisions and were therefore unlawful.

Citation
[2019] NIIT 09225_17IT
Parties
Claimant: Patrick Marks; First Respondent: James Lynch t/a Aylesforte Interiors; Second Respondent: Furniture Is Us Ltd
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
18 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Industrial Tribunal / Final Decision
Outcome
Claims for disability discrimination, unfair dismissal, and notice pay dismissed; claims for unlawful deduction from sick pay and holiday pay upheld against the second respondent.
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Unfair Dismissal, Unlawful Deduction From Wages, Notice Pay, Sick Pay, Holiday Pay
Employment Law Discrimination Law Disability Discrimination Unfair Dismissal Unlawful Deduction From Wages Notice Pay Sick Pay Holiday Pay

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Marks

Claimant

James Lynch t/a Aylesforte Interiors

First Respondent

Furniture Is Us Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Tribunal / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents discriminated against the claimant on the grounds of disability by failing to make reasonable adjustments
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was owed unpaid wages, holiday pay, and sick pay

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know of the claimant's disability at the material time, so the disability discrimination claim fails. The claimant was not unfairly dismissed as he was reinstated and continued to submit sick notes, indicating acceptance of employment. Deductions from sick pay and holiday pay by the second respondent were not authorised under the relevant statutory provisions and were therefore unlawful.

Court Disposition

Claims for disability discrimination, unfair dismissal, and notice pay dismissed; claims for unlawful deduction from sick pay and holiday pay upheld against the second respondent.

Orders

  • First respondent removed from claims for notice pay, sick pay, and holiday pay; those claims dismissed against him.
  • Claim for unfair dismissal dismissed.