Employment Practice and procedure. The employee was ordered to pay costs following an unsuccessful claim against her employer for sex and race discrimination, victimisation and sexual harassment. The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the employee's appeal to require the tribunal to consider the question of means afresh where it had failed to consider the employee's witness statement to the effect that she had no savings or investments.
Employment Discrimination. The Supreme Court dismissed the employer health board's appeal against the decision of the Inner House of the Court of Session upholding an employment tribunal's findings that the employee had been discriminated against on the grounds of her race and gender. It also reiterated the guidance in Igen Ltd v Wong IRLR 258 and Madarassy v Nomura International plc .
Employment Tribunal Procedure. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in dismissing the employee's appeal against an order made against him at a pre-hearing review requiring him to pay a deposit of 250 as a condition of being permitted to continue to take part in the proceedings (the deposit order), held that the judge had applied the correct test as to the making of the deposit order and had been entitled to conclude, on the evidence, that the employee had little prospect of providing evidence to demonstrate that he had been dismissed by way of retirement because he had been a thorn in the employer's side.
Costs Order for costs. The Chancery Division, following a substantive application for directions by the administrators of a company, made an order as to the costs of that hearing.
Employment Discrimination. The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that an employment tribunal had erred in finding the claimant had been racially and sexually discriminated against, particularly by the failure to investigate allegations of racial discrimination. Accordingly, the matter would be remitted to a freshly constituted tribunal.
Employment Discrimination against a woman. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in dismissing the employee's appeal against the decision of the employment tribunal, held that the tribunal had been correct to conclude that the employee had been dismissed for reason of redundancy and had not been discriminated against due to her pregnancy at the time of the dismissal.
Employment Disability. The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed an appeal alleging discrimination on the grounds of sex, race and age against the Health Professional Council on the basis that there had been no refusal of an application, since none had been made.
Agent Authority. The Privy Council upheld a finding that, although the claimant trustees of a company pension plan had not authorised the transfer of funds into the plan by the defendant, the transfer had been binding by the acts of the company which had been an agent with delegated administrative functions of the plan.
European Union Employment. The Court of Justice of the European Union (Second Chamber) ruled on the interpretation of art 6(1) of Council Directive (EC) 2000-78 (establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation) in the context of Swedish employment legislation which gave an employee the right to remain in employment until the end of the month in which he reached the age of 67.
Employment Tribunal Procedure. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in dismissing the employee's appeal against an award of costs against it following the dismissal by the employment tribunal (the tribunal) of claims for sex discrimination, victimisation, harassment and unpaid accrued holiday pay, held, inter alia, that the tribunal had not been shown to have committed any error either in terms of reaching its findings of fact or in the exercise of its discretion.