Serco Ltd v Dahou (Trade Union Rights : Action short of dismissal) [2014] UKEAT 0027_14_1408 (14 August 2014)

Serco Ltd v Dahou (Trade Union Rights : Action short of dismissal) [2014] UKEAT 0027_14_1408 (14 August 2014)

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by failing to properly consider the Respondent’s explanations for the alleged detrimental treatment and dismissal, misapplied the burden of proof, failed to distinguish between the roles and purposes of different decision-makers, and did not adequately address whether the trade union activities were at an 'appropriate time'. The Tribunal’s approach to causation and inferences was flawed, requiring the case to be remitted for fresh consideration.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0027_14_1408
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Serco Limited; Respondent/claimant: Mr Dahou
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
14 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing
Legal Topics
Trade Union Activities, Detriment, Automatic Unfair Dismissal, Burden of Proof, Appropriate Time for Union Activities
Employment Law Trade Union Activities Detriment Automatic Unfair Dismissal Burden of Proof Appropriate Time for Union Activities

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Serco Limited

Appellant/respondent

Mr Dahou

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in its approach to causation and burden of proof under s.146 and s.152 TULRCA 1992 regarding detriment and dismissal for trade union activities
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to consider the Respondent’s explanations for the alleged detrimental treatment and dismissal
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal properly addressed whether the trade union activities were at an 'appropriate time'

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by failing to properly consider the Respondent’s explanations for the alleged detrimental treatment and dismissal, misapplied the burden of proof, failed to distinguish between the roles and purposes of different decision-makers, and did not adequately address whether the trade union activities were at an 'appropriate time'. The Tribunal’s approach to causation and inferences was flawed, requiring the case to be remitted for fresh consideration.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing

Orders

  • Findings of unlawful detriment and automatically unfair dismissal set aside
  • Case remitted to a differently constituted Employment Tribunal for fresh consideration