Upton-Hansen Architects v Gyftaki (UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Mitigation of loss) [2019] UKEAT 0278_18_0905 (09 May 2019)

Upton-Hansen Architects v Gyftaki (UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Mitigation of loss) [2019] UKEAT 0278_18_0905 (09 May 2019)

The Tribunal was entitled to find that there was no fair reason for dismissal as none was pleaded or proven by the Respondent, and its findings regarding the reasons for suspension and inclusion of the July matter were open to it. The Tribunal did not conflate the section 98(1) and 98(4) tests, and section 98(4) was not engaged. The Tribunal was entitled to find no causative contributory conduct and no failure to mitigate loss. However, the Tribunal failed to sufficiently explain its calculation of the compensatory award for loss of remuneration, and this issue was remitted for reconsideration.

Citation
[2019] UKEAT 0278_18_0905
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Peninsula Business Services Ltd; Claimant/respondent: [Claimant Name Not Provided]
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
09 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; remitted for reconsideration of compensatory award calculation.
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Constructive Dismissal, Wrongful Dismissal, Mitigation of Loss, Contributory Fault
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Constructive Dismissal Wrongful Dismissal Mitigation of Loss Contributory Fault

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

Parties

Peninsula Business Services Ltd

Appellant/respondent

[Claimant Name Not Provided]

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in finding no fair reason for dismissal under section 98(1) ERA 1996
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal conflated the section 98(1) and section 98(4) ERA 1996 tests
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in not reducing the compensatory award for contributory conduct under section 123(6) ERA 1996

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to find that there was no fair reason for dismissal as none was pleaded or proven by the Respondent, and its findings regarding the reasons for suspension and inclusion of the July matter were open to it. The Tribunal did not conflate the section 98(1) and 98(4) tests, and section 98(4) was not engaged. The Tribunal was entitled to find no causative contributory conduct and no failure to mitigate loss. However, the Tribunal failed to sufficiently explain its calculation of the compensatory award for loss of remuneration, and this issue was remitted for reconsideration.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; remitted for reconsideration of compensatory award calculation.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed only in respect of the calculation of the compensatory award for loss of remuneration.
  • The matter is remitted to the Employment Tribunal to reconsider the calculation of the compensatory award.