Kuttappan v. Boyden & Anor [2001] UKEAT 1468_00_0606 (6 June 2001)

Kuttappan v. Boyden & Anor [2001] UKEAT 1468_00_0606 (6 June 2001)

There was no error of law in the Tribunal's rejection of the direct racial discrimination claim, the compensation awarded for victimisation was within the Tribunal's discretion, and there is no legal requirement to identify the dissenting Tribunal member.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 1468_00_0606
Parties
Appellant: Mr Kuttappan; First Respondent: Mr Boyden; Second Respondent: Midas Security Ltd; Third Respondent: Whitgift Centre Management Ltd
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
06 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Victimisation, Race Discrimination, Sex Discrimination, Compensation, Employment Tribunal Procedure
Employment Law Discrimination Law Victimisation Race Discrimination Sex Discrimination Compensation Employment Tribunal Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Kuttappan

Appellant

Mr Boyden

First Respondent

Midas Security Ltd

Second Respondent

Whitgift Centre Management Ltd

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in rejecting the claim of direct racial discrimination
  2. 2 Whether the compensation awarded for victimisation was inadequate
  3. 3 Whether failure to identify the dissenting Tribunal member was an error of law

Ratio Decidendi

There was no error of law in the Tribunal's rejection of the direct racial discrimination claim, the compensation awarded for victimisation was within the Tribunal's discretion, and there is no legal requirement to identify the dissenting Tribunal member.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed