The Claimant, Consultant Neonatologist, was dismissed for bullying colleagues. She asserted that the Respondent failed to make a reasonable adjustment in dismissing her as her disability, dyslexia, made it more likely that she would engage in that type of behaviour. She also asserted that, notwithstanding that her disability was identified at a case management discussion as dyslexia, this should be aggregated with depression which she said arose from her dyslexia.
Following a hearing on 29 & 30 January 2015 the EAT held that although the employment tribunal correctly considered the claim on the basis that the disability alleged was dyslexia: Chapman v Simon  IRLR 124 applied. Further, the tribunal had correctly concluded that there was no link between dyslexia and behaviour liable to amount or be perceived to amounting to bullying.
A cross-appeal from the finding of unfair dismissal was dismissed. The tribunal did not err in concluding that dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses as in the view of the dismissing manager, the conduct in question fell short of gross misconduct. Further it was unreasonable to assign a person to conduct and decide the outcome of the Claimant’s disciplinary hearing who, although of the right level, did not appear to have any training or experience in conducting hearings.
The ‘capable, efficient, and helpful’ clerks’ room provides ‘a service-orientated approach and goes above and beyond in trying to ensure you have the right barrister for the job ; you have the utmost confidence in the clerking.”
‘an extremely approachable set of chambers which puts a premium on service delivery.’
Old Square Chambers is delighted to announce that it has again been ranked as a top band set in the…
Old Square’s Nadia Motraghi is acting for the BMA in its judicial review of these controversial Regulations which impose a…View More