ICAP Management Services Ltd v Schmidt (Practice and Procedure) [2014] UKEAT 0005_14_2107 (21 July 2014)

ICAP Management Services Ltd v Schmidt (Practice and Procedure) [2014] UKEAT 0005_14_2107 (21 July 2014)

The Employment Judge erred in law by failing to address whether dismissal for repeated dishonesty was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim under section 15(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010; the amendment to the reasonable adjustments claim was based on an unsustainable PCP and should have been refused; the refusal to allow amendment to add a direct discrimination claim was within the Employment Judge's discretion and disclosed no error of law.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0005_14_2107
Parties
Claimant/appellant/cross Appellant: Miss Samantha Schmidt; Respondent/appellant: ICAP Management Services Ltd
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
21 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Interlocutory Decisions of Employment Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Wrongful Dismissal, Reasonable Adjustments, Direct Discrimination, Employment Tribunal Procedure, Deposit Orders, Amendment of Pleadings
Employment Law Discrimination Law Disability Discrimination Wrongful Dismissal Reasonable Adjustments Direct Discrimination Employment Tribunal Procedure Deposit Orders +1 more

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

Parties

Miss Samantha Schmidt

Claimant/appellant/cross Appellant

ICAP Management Services Ltd

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Interlocutory Decisions of Employment Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Judge erred in refusing to strike out or make a deposit order on claims of discrimination arising from disability and wrongful dismissal
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Judge erred in granting permission to amend the reasonable adjustments claim
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Judge erred in refusing permission to amend to add a claim of direct disability discrimination

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Judge erred in law by failing to address whether dismissal for repeated dishonesty was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim under section 15(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010; the amendment to the reasonable adjustments claim was based on an unsustainable PCP and should have been refused; the refusal to allow amendment to add a direct discrimination claim was within the Employment Judge's discretion and disclosed no error of law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Deposit order of £500 on each of the discrimination arising from disability and wrongful dismissal claims as a condition of proceeding.
  • Permission to amend the reasonable adjustments claim refused.