In Charlesworth v Dransfields Engineering Services Ltd, the EAT upheld an ET’s decision that Charlesworth (C) had not been subjected to unlawful discrimination arising from disability under S.15 of the Equality Act 2010 because C’s absence due to cancer was not the effective or operative cause of his dismissal. C’s absence had enabled the employer to identify the ability to manage without C’s role; therefore, the matter that caused C’s redundancy was the employer’s view that it could do without his job. In rejecting C’s appeal the EAT clarified the ‘causation’ test for S.15 claims.
In Basildon & Thurrock NHS Foundation Trust v Weerasinghe the EAT had held that first, there must be something arising in consequence of the disability; secondly, the unfavourable treatment must be “because of” that “something”. In Hall v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, the EAT described the causal connection as requiring: “… a significant influence on the unfavourable treatment, or a cause which is not the main or the sole cause, but is nonetheless an effective cause of the unfavourable treatment. …”.
The EAT held there is no conflict between the two approaches because in Hall the EAT described the influence that is required as a ‘significant’ one, therefore an argument that a mere influence [here, the absence] is sufficient, could not be accepted. What caused C’s dismissal was that the employer could manage without him. His absence, albeit part of the context, was not the effective or operative cause of his dismissal.
This update provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links to access full details. If no link is provided, contact us for more information. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, SM&B cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
