KEY EMPLOYMENT
& DISCRIMINATION
CASES 2010
Alison Collins
9th February 2011
(1) Veitch –v- Red Sky Group Ltd
• Jason Veitch – successful in claim of unfair
dismissal claim
• Appeal from Industrial Tribunal decision
• Disability Discrimination – reasonable
adjustments and victimisation
• Observations of Girvan LJ on the length of
the proceedings.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
2
Veitch –v- Red Sky Group Ltd
• Case – remitted for re-determination by a
fresh Tribunal.
• Respondent – expressed concern at the
length of proceedings – 16 days at Tribunal.
• LJ Girvan – overriding objections at
Tribunal Reg 3 (Industrial Tribunals
(Constitutional Rules of Procedure)
Regulations (NI) 2005.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
3
Veitch –v- Red Sky Group Ltd
• Recommended:
“Unnecessary protracted oral evidence could
usefully avoided by requiring a party to
ensure that the evidence in chief of
witnesses should be provided in the first
instance in a written statement with the
witness then being available for cross
examination only”.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
4
Veitch –v- Red Sky Group Ltd
• Tribunals – Case Management Discussions
• Day 1 – Parties do not attend Tribunal.
• Day 1 – Panel members read witness
statements
• Day 2 – Cross examination of witnesses
commences.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
5
(2) Andrew Locke -v- Candy &
Candy Ltd
• Claimant – dismissed ten days before he
acquired one year’s service.
• Paid 6 months in lieu of notice as per
contract.
• Entitlement to bonus: £160,000 if remained
employed for 12 months.
• Raised a claim for non-payment of bonus.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
6
Andrew Locke -v- Candy &
Candy Ltd
• Sum claimed beyond financial limit of
Tribunal.
• Claimant pursued his claim in the High
Court
• Unsuccessful.
• Appealed to Court of Appeal.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
7
Andrew Locke -v- Candy &
Candy Ltd
• Court of Appeal held contract had to be
held “holistically”
• Bonus clause and its restrictions had to be
applied when calculating the payment.
• COA held – not entitled to payment of
bonus of £160,000.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
8
(3) Kraft Foods UK Ltd v Hastie
[2010] EqLR 18 EAT
• Contractual voluntary redundancy scheme
• Cap on awards that could be made.
• Prevented employees recovering more than
they would have earned if they had
remained in employment until retirement
age
• Claimant – reduced his amount by £14,000
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
9
Kraft Foods UK Ltd v Hastie
• Tribunal held cap disproportionately
applied to those approaching retiring age.
• Unjustifiable and unlawful discrimination
contrary to the Employment Equality (Age)
Regulations 2006
• Case appealed to EAT
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
10
Kraft Foods UK Ltd v Hastie
• EAT: Disagreed with the Tribunal’s decision.
• Held: Proportionate means of achieving a
legitimate aim to impose a cap preventing the
"windfall" of an employee recovering more than
he could have recovered had he stayed in
employment until retirement.
• Compensate employees for loss of the expectation
of remaining in employment.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
11
Homer v Chief Constable of West
Yorkshire Police [2010]
•
•
•
•
Case on indirect discrimination.
Requirement introduced: To be in the top
grade for legal adviser an employee had to
obtain a law degree.
Claimant: 30 years’ service.
Police Officer – Legal Adviser.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
12
Homer v Chief Constable of West
Yorkshire Police [2010]
• Claimant advised that his employer would
pay for him to do a law degree.
• Claimant met all other criteria for the role.
• Court of Appeal held: requirement did not
cause any particular disadvantage for
employees between 60 and 65 without law
degrees even though close to retirement.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
13
Homer v Chief Constable of West
Yorkshire Police [2010]
• Whatever the employee’s age was when the
provision, criterion or practice was
introduced, he would have failed to achieve
the top grade until he obtained the degree.
9th February 2011 - Employment &
Discrimination Cases 2011
14