Martin v. Devonshires Solicitors [2010] UKEAT 0086_10_0812 (9 December 2010)

Martin v. Devonshires Solicitors [2010] UKEAT 0086_10_0812 (9 December 2010)

The Tribunal was entitled to find that the operative reason for dismissal was not the making of protected complaints of discrimination, but the Appellant's mental illness, the falsity and repetitive nature of her allegations, her lack of insight, and the consequent risk of disruptive behaviour; these features were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] UKEAT 0086_10_0812
Parties
Appellant: Appellant (C); Respondent: Devonshires Solicitors (Respondents)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
09 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Victimisation, Sex Discrimination, Disability Discrimination, Unfair Dismissal, Burden of Proof, Reasonable Adjustments
Employment Law Discrimination Law Victimisation Sex Discrimination Disability Discrimination Unfair Dismissal Burden of Proof Reasonable Adjustments

Source-derived case record

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 24 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant (C)

Appellant

Devonshires Solicitors (Respondents)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether dismissal constituted victimisation under Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and Disability Discrimination Act 1995
  2. 2 Whether dismissal was unfair under Employment Rights Act 1996
  3. 3 Proper legal test for causation and comparator in victimisation claims

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to find that the operative reason for dismissal was not the making of protected complaints of discrimination, but the Appellant's mental illness, the falsity and repetitive nature of her allegations, her lack of insight, and the consequent risk of disruptive behaviour; these features were properly separable from the protected acts and did not constitute victimisation under the relevant statutes.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No relief granted to Appellant
  • Tribunal's dismissal of victimisation and unfair dismissal claims upheld