Tenner v PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP [2011] NIIT 05877_09IT (23 June 2011)

Tenner v PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP [2011] NIIT 05877_09IT (23 June 2011)

The tribunal found that the claimant was not subjected to direct disability discrimination, associative disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, or victimisation. The redundancy was not a sham and was based on genuine business needs. The respondent's actions, while sometimes lacking in sympathy, did not amount to unlawful discrimination or procedural unfairness under the relevant statutory provisions.

Citation
[2011] NIIT 05877_09IT
Parties
Claimant: Colin Tenner; Respondent: PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
23 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Industrial Tribunal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Direct Disability Discrimination, Associative Disability Discrimination, Reasonable Adjustments, Victimisation, Redundancy Procedures
Employment Law Discrimination Law Direct Disability Discrimination Associative Disability Discrimination Reasonable Adjustments Victimisation Redundancy Procedures

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colin Tenner

Claimant

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Industrial Tribunal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was subjected to direct disability discrimination
  2. 2 Whether the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments
  3. 3 Whether there was associative disability discrimination based on the claimant's mother's disability

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the claimant was not subjected to direct disability discrimination, associative disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, or victimisation. The redundancy was not a sham and was based on genuine business needs. The respondent's actions, while sometimes lacking in sympathy, did not amount to unlawful discrimination or procedural unfairness under the relevant statutory provisions.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed