Key Facts
- •Patrick Arthur-Badoo (Appellant) was employed by Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust (Respondent).
- •Appellant provided evidence of his right to work in the UK as the spouse of an EU national.
- •Respondent required Appellant to undergo ECS checks despite the provided evidence.
- •Appellant was suspended without pay.
- •Appellant claimed unauthorised deduction from wages, indirect race discrimination, and direct marital discrimination.
- •The Employment Tribunal dismissed all claims.
Legal Principles
Unlawful deduction from wages
Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA), section 13
Indirect race discrimination
Equality Act 2010 (EQA), section 19
Direct marital discrimination
Case law: Gould v Trustees of St John's Downshire Hill, UKEAT/0115/17/DA
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
The Employment Tribunal failed to properly determine the complaints. It did not adequately analyze whether the respondent had reasonable evidence to justify the deduction from wages or properly assess the indirect race and marital discrimination claims.
Unauthorised deduction from wages complaint remitted to be redetermined.
The Tribunal failed to consider whether the respondent had reasonable evidence that the claimant was not entitled to work in the UK, given the evidence provided.
Indirect race discrimination complaint remitted to be redetermined.
The Tribunal's reasoning was unsafe and incomplete, failing to address key elements of the claim, such as the relevant pool for comparison and whether the claimant suffered a particular disadvantage.
Direct marital discrimination complaint remitted to be redetermined.
The Tribunal did not adequately assess the claim, and the complexity of comparing the appellant's situation to a suitable comparator was not fully addressed.
Remission to a differently constituted Employment Tribunal.
The Employment Tribunal's errors were fundamental, its judgment unsafe, and it failed to adequately engage with the claimant's application for reconsideration.