McKimm v Down District Council [2008] NIIT 1229_05IT_2 (30 July 2008)

McKimm v Down District Council [2008] NIIT 1229_05IT_2 (30 July 2008)

The tribunal found that the claimant was subjected to unlawful victimisation discrimination in three specific acts: aggressive and abusive behaviour by Ms O'Connor during a telephone conversation, criticism of the Arts team's contribution to the St Patrick's Day Parade, and the inappropriate instigation of a disciplinary process. These acts were by reason of the claimant's protected act (her internal grievance alleging sex discrimination), and a reasonable worker would regard them as detriments. The other alleged acts were not well-founded. The tribunal applied the burden of proof provisions and found the respondent failed to provide an adequate non-discriminatory explanation for these acts.

Citation
[2008] NIIT 1229_05IT_2
Parties
Claimant: Cathie McKimm; Respondent: Down District Council
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
30 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Industrial Tribunal Discrimination (victimisation) / Liability Hearing (remedies Reserved for Later)
Outcome
Partial success for claimant on liability; three acts of unlawful victimisation discrimination found; all other claims dismissed; remedies to be determined at a later stage.
Legal Topics
Victimisation, Sex Discrimination, Constructive Dismissal, Equal Pay, Burden of Proof
Employment Law Equality Law Victimisation Sex Discrimination Constructive Dismissal Equal Pay Burden of Proof

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cathie McKimm

Claimant

Down District Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Tribunal Discrimination (victimisation) / Liability Hearing (remedies Reserved for Later)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was subjected to unlawful victimisation discrimination contrary to Article 8 of the Sex Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 1976
  2. 2 Whether the acts complained of constituted 'detriment' within the meaning of the Order
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was constructively dismissed by reason of victimisation discrimination

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the claimant was subjected to unlawful victimisation discrimination in three specific acts: aggressive and abusive behaviour by Ms O'Connor during a telephone conversation, criticism of the Arts team's contribution to the St Patrick's Day Parade, and the inappropriate instigation of a disciplinary process. These acts were by reason of the claimant's protected act (her internal grievance alleging sex discrimination), and a reasonable worker would regard them as detriments. The other alleged acts were not well-founded. The tribunal applied the burden of proof provisions and found the respondent failed to provide an adequate non-discriminatory explanation for these acts.

Court Disposition

Partial success for claimant on liability; three acts of unlawful victimisation discrimination found; all other claims dismissed; remedies to be determined at a later stage.

Orders

  • The claimant was subjected to unlawful victimisation discrimination in three specified acts.
  • All other victimisation discrimination claims are dismissed.