Palihakkara v British Telecommunications Plc [2009] UKEAT 0167_09_2907 (29 July 2009)
The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in its findings or approach to the evidence, correctly applied the relevant legal principles, and properly refused to admit new evidence. The appeal amounted to disagreement with factual findings, not legal error. No grounds of appeal succeeded.
- Citation
- [2009] UKEAT 0167_09_2907
- Parties
- Appellant/claimant: Miss S Palihakkara; Respondent: BT (British Telecommunications)
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 29 July 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing on Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Race Discrimination, Sex Discrimination, Victimisation, Breach of Contract, Practice and Procedure, New Evidence on Appeal
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Miss S Palihakkara
Appellant/claimant
BT (British Telecommunications)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in dismissing claims of direct race and sex discrimination and victimisation
- 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in handling breach of contract claims
- 3 Whether new evidence should be admitted on appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in its findings or approach to the evidence, correctly applied the relevant legal principles, and properly refused to admit new evidence. The appeal amounted to disagreement with factual findings, not legal error. No grounds of appeal succeeded.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Directions to be given for a remedy hearing on the outstanding breach of contract claim regarding delay in grievance handling.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment