N Moustache v Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust
[2022] EAT 204
Edge Hill University v E Glasby
6 December 2023
[2023] EAT 162
Employment Appeal Tribunal
A university employee with disabilities was fired. A court found the original judgment about unfair dismissal was poorly reasoned and sent the case back to a new court for a re-trial.
Key Facts
- •The claimant, a wheelchair user diagnosed with cancer, was dismissed from Edge Hill University due to high levels of sickness absence.
- •The employment tribunal upheld some complaints of failure to comply with the duty of reasonable adjustment and discrimination arising from disability.
- •The tribunal's reasoning was deemed fundamentally inadequate and defective, with insufficient reasons provided for upholding certain complaints.
- •The appeal concerned the adequacy of the tribunal's reasons and the correctness of its conclusions regarding reasonable adjustments and discrimination.
Legal Principles
Duty of reasonable adjustment under sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010, read together with section 39.
Equality Act 2010
Discrimination arising from disability under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010.
Equality Act 2010
Justification defense in discrimination claims.
Case law (implied)
Meek-compliance standard for tribunal reasons.
Case law (implied)
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The tribunal's reasons for upholding the complaints were fundamentally inadequate and/or defective, lacking sufficient reasoning on essential elements of the causes of action.
Complaints remitted for fresh determination by a new tribunal panel.
The inadequacy of the original tribunal's reasons and concerns about the lay members' conclusions regarding witness credibility necessitate a fresh hearing before a new panel.