Johnson v Mitie Asset Management Ltd (Victimisation Discrimination : Protected disclosure) [2014] UKEAT 0046_14_1807 (18 July 2014)

Johnson v Mitie Asset Management Ltd (Victimisation Discrimination : Protected disclosure) [2014] UKEAT 0046_14_1807 (18 July 2014)

Despite some inadequacies in the Tribunal's findings and reasoning, the clear and unambiguous finding was that the reason for the Claimant's dismissal was redundancy arising from a genuine restructuring, not any protected disclosure or disability. The Tribunal's errors did not affect the outcome, as there was no causative link between any protected disclosure or disability and the dismissal, and no reasonable adjustment was required beyond what was already done.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0046_14_1807
Parties
Appellant: Claimant (Appellant); Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
18 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Victimisation, Protected Disclosure (whistleblowing), Disability Discrimination, Unfair Dismissal, Reasonable Adjustments
Employment Law Discrimination Law Victimisation Protected Disclosure (whistleblowing) Disability Discrimination Unfair Dismissal Reasonable Adjustments

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 8 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant (Appellant)

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant made protected disclosures under section 43B Employment Rights Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal was causally linked to any protected disclosure
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant was disabled under section 6(1) and Schedule 1 Equality Act 2010

Ratio Decidendi

Despite some inadequacies in the Tribunal's findings and reasoning, the clear and unambiguous finding was that the reason for the Claimant's dismissal was redundancy arising from a genuine restructuring, not any protected disclosure or disability. The Tribunal's errors did not affect the outcome, as there was no causative link between any protected disclosure or disability and the dismissal, and no reasonable adjustment was required beyond what was already done.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed