Case report round-up: Normally fair to hold disciplinary hearing before related grievance appeal

XpertHR's latest case reports cover:

Proceeding with disciplinary hearing prior to holding related grievance appeal hearing In Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster) v Marshall and another EAT/0488/09, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that it will only rarely be unfair for an employer to proceed with a disciplinary hearing prior to holding a related grievance appeal hearing. (Employers' Law)
Reversal of burden of proof applies in sex discrimination victimisation claims In Pothecary Witham Weld and another v Bullimore and another EAT/0158/09, the Employment Appeal Tribunal said that the Court of Appeal ruling in Oyarce v Cheshire County Council [2008] IRLR 653 CA, where it was held that the reversal of the burden of proof is not applicable in race victimisation cases, does not apply to sex discrimination claims. (Employers' Law)
Protection against detriment for whistleblowing made to previous employer In BP plc v Elstone and another EAT/0141/09, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that a worker can be protected against suffering a detriment for whistleblowing by his or her current employer when the protected disclosure was made to a previous employer. (Employers' Law)
Continuous acts in race discrimination cases In Aziz v First Division Association (FDA) [2010] EWCA Civ 304 CA, the Court of Appeal held that, where a claimant is alleging that separate incidents form one continuous act for the purposes of extending the normal time limit within which to bring a claim for racial discrimination, a relevant but not conclusive factor is whether the same individuals or different individuals were involved in the separate incidents. (Employers' Law)
Compensation for injury to feelings when unaware that act was discriminatory In Taylor v XLN Telecom Ltd and others [2010] IRLR 499 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that employees who successfully claim discrimination are entitled to be compensated for any injury to health or injury to feelings caused by the act complained of, even if they were unaware that the act complained of was discriminatory. (Employers' Law)
Unfair dismissal: Failure properly to consider explanation of uncharacteristic behaviour during hypoglycaemic episode resulted in unfair dismissal In City of Edinburgh Council v Dickson EATS/0038/09, the EAT upheld the employment tribunal's decision that an employee whose employer failed properly to consider his explanation that he had behaved out of character during a hypoglycaemic episode was unfairly dismissed. However, the tribunal's conclusion that the employer's rejection of that explanation amounted to direct and disability-related discrimination was wrong in law and was overturned. (Employment Review)
Contracts: Agreement on crew numbers not incorporated into employees' contracts In Malone and others v British Airways plc [2010] IRLR 431 HC, the High Court held that the provisions of a collective agreement purporting to set "minimum" cabin crew numbers for different routes and types of craft were not incorporated into individual employees' contracts of employment. In any event, an injunction would not be granted to restrain the employer from reducing cabin crew numbers below the levels specified, and, even if there had been a breach of contract, any award for damages would be for a nominal amount only. (Employment Review)

Also

Editor's choice

Case report round-up: Normally fair to hold disciplinary hearing before related grievance appeal

Was this article helpful?

About this resource

Case report round-up: Normally fair to hold disciplinary hearing before related grievance appeal