Bayton v Saurus General Engineers Ltd [1998] UKEAT 1002_98_0411 (4 November 1998)

The tribunal's approach to comparator and justification raises arguable points; sufficient time is allowed for Counsel to amend the Notice of Appeal to properly argue these issues.

Citation: [1998] UKEAT 1002_98_0411
Parties: Appellant: Mr Bayton; Respondent: Saurus General Engineers Ltd
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 04 November 1998
Procedural Posture: Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing Ex Parte
Outcome: directions issued for amended Notice of Appeal; appeal not yet determined
Legal Topics: Disability Discrimination, Comparator Selection, Justification Defence

Employment Law Discrimination Law Disability Discrimination Comparator Selection Justification Defence

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

Mr Bayton

Appellant

Saurus General Engineers Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing Ex Parte

Legal Issues

1 correct comparator under Disability Discrimination Act 1995 s.5(1)(a)
2 proper approach to justification defence under Disability Discrimination Act 1995 s.5(1)(b) and s.5(3)

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal's approach to comparator and justification raises arguable points; sufficient time is allowed for Counsel to amend the Notice of Appeal to properly argue these issues.

Court Disposition

directions issued for amended Notice of Appeal; appeal not yet determined

Orders

Appellant to file draft amended Notice of Appeal within 42 days.
Draft amended Notice to be marked for Judge Peter Clark's attention.