Tree v South East Coastal Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (Practice and Procedure) [2017] UKEAT 0043_17_0407 (04 July 2017)

Tree v South East Coastal Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (Practice and Procedure) [2017] UKEAT 0043_17_0407 (04 July 2017)

The Tribunal was entitled to make a Deposit Order for the section 13 direct discrimination claim, given the difficulties in establishing a suitable comparator and causation, but erred in respect of the section 15 claim by failing to properly identify and consider the way the claim was put, misunderstanding the scope of section 15, and not addressing factual disputes that required a full hearing.

Citation
[2017] UKEAT 0043_17_0407
Parties
Appellant: Claimant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
04 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Full Hearing of Appeal Against Deposit Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Deposit Orders, Procedural Fairness, Direct Discrimination, Discrimination Arising From Disability
Employment Law Discrimination Law Disability Discrimination Deposit Orders Procedural Fairness Direct Discrimination Discrimination Arising From Disability

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Full Hearing of Appeal Against Deposit Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in making a Deposit Order for disability discrimination claims under sections 13 and 15 of the Equality Act 2010
  2. 2 Whether procedural unfairness arose due to lack of notice regarding Deposit Order for section 15 claim
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal misunderstood the legal principles under section 15 Equality Act 2010 and guidance in Pnaiser v NHS England

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to make a Deposit Order for the section 13 direct discrimination claim, given the difficulties in establishing a suitable comparator and causation, but erred in respect of the section 15 claim by failing to properly identify and consider the way the claim was put, misunderstanding the scope of section 15, and not addressing factual disputes that required a full hearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Deposit Order in respect of section 15 claim set aside
  • Deposit Order of £500 substituted for section 13 claim only