Gibson v London Borough of Hounslow & Anor [2018] UKEAT 0033_18_2012 (20 December 2018)

Gibson v London Borough of Hounslow & Anor [2018] UKEAT 0033_18_2012 (20 December 2018)

The Tribunal was entitled to find that the Claimant's treatment and dismissal were not materially influenced by protected disclosures but by her unmanageability and failure to follow procedures. Compensation was properly limited to the period of lawful entitlement to work in the UK, as the Claimant did not request visa renewal and the Respondent was not obliged to act unilaterally.

Citation
[2018] UKEAT 0033_18_2012
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Ms Gibson; First Respondent: London Borough of Hounslow; Second Respondent: Crane Park Primary School
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
20 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal (liability and Remedy Judgments)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed except for two detriments; case remitted to Tribunal to determine those two matters.
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Whistleblowing, Protected Disclosure, Victimisation, Wrongful Dismissal, Holiday Pay, Compensation, Polkey Deduction
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Whistleblowing Protected Disclosure Victimisation Wrongful Dismissal Holiday Pay Compensation +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms Gibson

Claimant/appellant

London Borough of Hounslow

First Respondent

Crane Park Primary School

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal (liability and Remedy Judgments)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in determining that certain disclosures did not qualify for protection under the Employment Rights Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to determine or give reasons for all of the Claimant's claims and detriments
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in its assessment of causation and the influence of protected disclosures on alleged detriments

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to find that the Claimant's treatment and dismissal were not materially influenced by protected disclosures but by her unmanageability and failure to follow procedures. Compensation was properly limited to the period of lawful entitlement to work in the UK, as the Claimant did not request visa renewal and the Respondent was not obliged to act unilaterally.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed except for two detriments; case remitted to Tribunal to determine those two matters.

Orders

  • Remit to the same Tribunal to make findings and determine Detriment 1 (alleged threat to teaching licence) and Detriment 2 (alleged false allegation) as set out in the additional information served on 23 November 2016.
  • Tribunal bound by existing findings; no new evidence to be heard; submissions and evidence from Liability Hearing to be considered.