Ryan v South West Ambulance Services NHS Trust (AGE DISCRIMINATION) [2020] UKEAT 0213_19_0610 (06 October 2020 )

Ryan v South West Ambulance Services NHS Trust (AGE DISCRIMINATION) [2020] UKEAT 0213_19_0610 (06 October 2020 )

The Tribunal erred by failing to properly identify and align the group and individual disadvantage, and by incorrectly concluding that the Claimant's failure to appeal or self-nominate broke the causal link between the PCP and her disadvantage. The correct approach required only correspondence between the group and individual disadvantage, not an inquiry into the reasons for the disadvantage. The Tribunal's analysis of justification was also inadequate as it did not critically evaluate whether the PCP was no more than necessary to achieve the Respondent's aims.

Citation
[2020] UKEAT 0213_19_0610
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mrs Ryan; Respondent: NHS Foundation Trust
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Indirect Discrimination, Age Discrimination, Justification Defence, Provision, Criterion or Practice (pcp), Equality Act 2010
Employment Law Equality Law Indirect Discrimination Age Discrimination Justification Defence Provision, Criterion or Practice (pcp) Equality Act 2010

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Ryan

Appellant/claimant

NHS Foundation Trust

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in finding no causal link between the PCP and the disadvantage suffered by the Claimant
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in concluding the PCP was objectively justified

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal erred by failing to properly identify and align the group and individual disadvantage, and by incorrectly concluding that the Claimant's failure to appeal or self-nominate broke the causal link between the PCP and her disadvantage. The correct approach required only correspondence between the group and individual disadvantage, not an inquiry into the reasons for the disadvantage. The Tribunal's analysis of justification was also inadequate as it did not critically evaluate whether the PCP was no more than necessary to achieve the Respondent's aims.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The Tribunal's decision is set aside and the matter is remitted for reconsideration in accordance with the correct legal principles.