Dismissal as an act of discrimination under s.39(2)(c) Equality Act 2010, distinct from unfair dismissal under the ERA. City of York Council v Grosset.
Discrimination arising from disability; s.15 EqA 2010. Section 15(1)(a) requires only an objective causal connection between the disability and the "something" that led to the unfavourable treatment; the employer need not be aware that the something arose in consequence of the disability. Knowledge under s.15(2) bites on the disability itself, not on the causal link [36]-[39]. A tribunal deciding justification under s.15(1)(b) makes its own objective assessment and is not confined to the material the employer had, so a finding that dismissal was reasonable for s.98(4) purposes does not determine proportionality.
Disability discrimination; reasonable adjustments; dismissal under s.39(2)(c) EqA 2010. The EAT (Judge Tayler) held that the tribunal erred in finding no provision, criterion or practice regarding working patterns, and remitted the reasonable adjustments claim. The case illustrates how dismissal flowing from a failure to make reasonable adjustments engages s.39(2)(c) as a standalone EqA claim, distinct from the ERA 1996 unfair dismissal regime.
Disability discrimination; discriminatory dismissal; s.15 EqA 2010; s.39(2)(c). The EAT considered the distinction between an unfair dismissal claim under ERA 1996 (requiring two years' qualifying service) and a discriminatory dismissal claim under the Equality Act 2010 (no qualifying service required, uncapped compensation). Confirms that where a dismissal is itself an act of discrimination, the remedy lies under the EqA as a standalone cause of action, not as a species of automatic unfair dismissal.
Discriminatory constructive dismissal; time limits; procedure. The EAT (Eady J P) held that a claim of discriminatory constructive dismissal is a distinct cause of action that must be identified and determined by the tribunal. Where an employer's repudiatory breach of contract is itself an act of disability discrimination, the resulting constructive dismissal is itself discriminatory, with compensation uncapped. The time limit runs from the date of the constructive dismissal (acceptance of breach by resignation), not from earlier acts of discrimination.
Discriminatory dismissal; s.39(2)(c) EqA 2010; conflation of causes of action. The tribunal explained that a claim of unfair dismissal under ERA 1996 and a claim of discriminatory dismissal under the Equality Act 2010 are separate matters. Where the claimant had conflated a claim of automatic unfair dismissal 'arising from the EqA' with a standalone EqA dismissal claim, the tribunal proceeded only with the EqA claim when no recognised automatic unfair ground was pleaded. Illustrates the practical importance of correctly identifying discriminatory dismissal as a freestanding EqA cause of action.