Staph v Norgren European Logistics Company Ltd (Race Discrimination) [2017] UKEAT 0211_16_2001 (20 January 2017)

Staph v Norgren European Logistics Company Ltd (Race Discrimination) [2017] UKEAT 0211_16_2001 (20 January 2017)

The Employment Tribunal considered both the individual and cumulative allegations of discrimination and harassment, found no evidence of discrimination, and thus permissibly rejected the claim of discriminatory constructive dismissal. Any omission to expressly address the constructive dismissal claim in the original judgment was remedied by the ET's reconsideration decision, which provided adequate reasons for the Claimant to understand why he lost.

Citation
[2017] UKEAT 0211_16_2001
Parties
Appellant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
20 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Full Hearing of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Direct Race Discrimination, Constructive Dismissal, Harassment, Adequacy of Reasons, Appellate Jurisdiction
Employment Law Equality Law Direct Race Discrimination Constructive Dismissal Harassment Adequacy of Reasons Appellate Jurisdiction

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 1 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Full Hearing of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal failed to address or provide adequate reasons for rejecting the claim of discriminatory constructive dismissal
  2. 2 Whether the cumulative effect of alleged acts amounted to discriminatory constructive dismissal
  3. 3 Whether the Employment Tribunal properly considered unconscious or subconscious discrimination

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal considered both the individual and cumulative allegations of discrimination and harassment, found no evidence of discrimination, and thus permissibly rejected the claim of discriminatory constructive dismissal. Any omission to expressly address the constructive dismissal claim in the original judgment was remedied by the ET's reconsideration decision, which provided adequate reasons for the Claimant to understand why he lost.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed