Apasenth Ltd v Nessa (Victimisation Discrimination: Protected disclosure) [2015] UKEAT 0126_15_1412 (14 December 2015)

Apasenth Ltd v Nessa (Victimisation Discrimination: Protected disclosure) [2015] UKEAT 0126_15_1412 (14 December 2015)

The Employment Tribunal did not err in its approach to credibility and was entitled to accept or reject evidence on an issue-by-issue basis; however, it failed to analyse detriment in relation to protected disclosure grievances according to the spectrum set out in Singh, amounting to an error of law requiring remission.

Citation
[2015] UKEAT 0126_15_1412
Parties
Appellant: Apasenth Ltd; Respondent: Ayrun Nessa
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
14 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed on perversity; appeal allowed on detriment in protected disclosure; case remitted to Employment Tribunal to reconsider detriment.
Legal Topics
Victimisation, Protected Disclosure, Constructive Dismissal, Unlawful Deductions, Holiday Pay, Harassment, Credibility, Detriment
Employment Law Discrimination Law Victimisation Protected Disclosure Constructive Dismissal Unlawful Deductions Holiday Pay Harassment +2 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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Apasenth Ltd

Appellant

Ayrun Nessa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal's findings on credibility were perverse
  2. 2 Whether delay and communication failures regarding grievance amounted to detriment under section 47B ERA 1996
  3. 3 Whether detriment can arise from dishonest or fabricated grievances

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal did not err in its approach to credibility and was entitled to accept or reject evidence on an issue-by-issue basis; however, it failed to analyse detriment in relation to protected disclosure grievances according to the spectrum set out in Singh, amounting to an error of law requiring remission.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed on perversity; appeal allowed on detriment in protected disclosure; case remitted to Employment Tribunal to reconsider detriment.

Orders

  • Issue of detriment in protected disclosure grievance remitted to Employment Tribunal for reconsideration.
  • Restricted Reporting Order remains in force until Tribunal lifts it.