Victory at Tribunal – Unfair Dismissal and Perceived Disability Discrimination

perceived discriminationBrief Background

The case involved a dismissal and perceived discrimination (specifically, perceived disability discrimination) Mr. Lee was injured at work, which caused a lengthy period of absence. This resulted in Mr. Lee being dismissed. He was still waiting for treatment when he was dismissed.

Mr. Lee appealed his dismissal, and when he attended the appeal, he had fully recovered, but his appeal was unsuccessful. His employer acknowledged he was recovered but felt there was an “underlying issue” and that he had a “clear susceptibility to further injury.”

Legal Expenses Insurance – LEI

When we were introduced to Mr. Lee, he had already presented his Tribunal case without legal representation.

Thankfully, Mr. Lee had legal expenses insurance (LEI) and we liaised with the insurer on Mr. Lee’s behalf to get cover in place.

We then took over the Tribunal claim, and our fees were funded by the insurer.

Clarifying the Claims

Shortly after taking over the claim, there was to be a “preliminary hearing” (PH), which is where the Tribunal seeks to clarify the claims and make case management orders to ensure the smooth progress of the case.

Clarifying the exact nature of the allegations (both factually and legally) is very important and the PH is the ideal opportunity to do this.

Mr. Lee’s case was complex and document-heavy, but after the PH, the claims he had presented himself were now factually and legally defined.

If claims remain unclear, their chance of success is much lower.

Application to add a new Claim

The facts of Mr. Lee’s case were unique, in that, despite being dismissed for long-term absence, the injury had fully resolved before the end of the process and did not amount to a disability. Without a disability, you are not able to claim ordinary “disability discrimination.”

However, there was an argument that the dismissal appeal failed because the panel believed (albeit wrongly) that Mr. Lee was disabled because they felt he had an underlying condition and would get injured again when returning to work.

This is known as “perceived disability discrimination.”
The basis of the argument was, the appeal did not fail because of a disability, but because the panel perceived (or believed) that there was a disability. This is a different (and lesser-known) type of disability discrimination.

This claim was not originally brought, so we made an application for it to be included in the proceedings.

Second PH

The other side objected to this new claim being included, so the Tribunal listed another PH to decide if this claim (the perceived disability claim) could be included.

The parties attended the Tribunal and made representations and we were successful in getting the new claim added.

Potential Value of Claims

An important point on the potential value of claims is that if an unfair dismissal claim succeeds, the main element of the compensation (the “compensatory award”) is capped at the lower of 52 weeks’ salary or a yearly benchmark (the cap in 2022 as an example is £93,878).

However, if a discrimination claim succeeds, the statutory cap is lifted.

To give an example, if the yearly salary at the relevant employment was £40,000, the compensatory award cannot exceed this amount. Equally, if it was £200,000, it would be capped at £93,878.

The Trial

Working closely with Mr. Lee, we prepared everything for his hearing.

There was a 5-day hearing that took place online.

Mr. Lee gave evidence and the other side had 3 witnesses.

We represented Mr. Lee at the Trial and the judgment was reserved, meaning it was to be sent to us in writing.

Outcome – Unfair Dismissal and Perceived Discrimination

We received the written judgment and the claims for unfair dismissal and perceived disability discrimination succeeded.

This meant the statutory cap to the compensatory award would not be applied.

A remedies hearing was scheduled (this is a hearing to determine compensation).

The parties achieved a settlement, and the remedies hearing was not needed.

We would like to thank Mr Lee for his review below and for allowing us to publish his story above.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Get In Touch

Please call us on 0207 118 9218 or complete a Free Online Enquiry and we will be in touch.

“Excellent firm, I have no fault with the way they dealt and handled my case. If I struggled understanding anything, it would be explained and clarified. Would recommend to anyone 100% good at what they do.”

Robert Smith

“Highly recommend Blair Toner to anyone needing employment legal advice. Blair dealt with my case professionally, promptly and with a human approach. He was on the ball with my case, always kept me up to date as things progressed, and made sure I always understood what my options were, I was given all the information and guidance needed, which made the whole process a lot smoother. An extremely reliable and dedicated service, thank you again Blair!”

Lee Hatch

“When looking to expand, understanding the difference between employees, workers & contractors etc was a challenge. Despite our own best efforts, getting decent contracts in place for new staff was far from straightforward. Toner Legal took care of this issue and will continue to provide all our legal support in the future.”

- Jo, Director, JTS Creative

I had an amazing experience with Toner Legal. Blair and L’wren have been a star helping and explaining everything in details. Thank you for the great work.

The Return Of The Soul

“Blair is a great Barrister that supported me to win a very difficult case that I had previously spent thousands of pounds with a solicitor before l contacted him directly. He went beyond the required duties to even support me in sourcing funding from external sources to enable me pay for the court fees. His own fees were so reasonable and l wished l met him at the beginning of this case which should have saved me a lot of money.

I really recommend his service to anyone as he is very good and will also be real with you.”

Patricia Obichukwu