Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

In the case of Sheikholeslami v University of Edinburgh UKEATS/0014/17/JW the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld a Claimant’s appeal after the Employment Tribunal erred in law by applying the wrong tests to her discrimination claims.

The facts in Sheikholeslami v University of Edinburgh

Professor Sheikholesalami (the ‘Claimant’) was a professor in chemical process engineering at the University of Edinburgh (the ‘Respondent’).  The Claimant was originally offered employment on the basis that she would be given a suitable laboratory. There were problems with the refurbishment of the laboratory, which meant that the Claimant was without a working laboratory for nearly two and a half years. She raised grievances about her treatment, alleging sex discrimination. This culminated in her being signed off sick with work related stress. As a result of her complaints a diversity review was undertaken which highlighted cultural problems within the workplace.

Following the review, relationships broke down between the Claimant and other staff members in the school. She wrote a letter stating that she wished to return to work via gradual reintegration through another school but the department suggested instead that she return to work at her existing refurbished laboratory. Eventually, the Claimant was dismissed.  The Respondent argued that this was because her work visa was due to expire. The Claimant complained that the real reason for her dismissal was to avoid the problem of her continued and sustained complaints of gender and disability discrimination.

The decision of the Employment Tribunal

The Tribunal found that the Claimant was dismissed because she was not prepared to return to work at the Engineering School and that this triggered the problems with her visa. The reason for her unwillingness to return to work appeared to be her perception that she would be treated badly by her colleagues (which triggered her disability in the first place). The Tribunal dismissed her disability discrimination claim because, it held, it did not have the evidence to say that her dismissal was because of her disability.

With regards to the Claimant’s reasonable adjustments claim, the Tribunal agreed that the Respondent did apply a PCP to the Claimant requiring her to attend work at the School of Engineering. However, it then went on to consider whether the PCP placed the Claimant at a substantial disadvantage because of her disability. In answering this question, its position was that the Claimant had to prove the PCP placed her at a substantial disadvantage and show that this was because of her disability.  They went on to find that the PCP did not place the Claimant at a substantial disadvantage because of her PCP and accordingly dismissed her claim.

The Claimant appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal

The decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal

The EAT held that the Tribunal was wrong in its approach to causation. The correct test required the Tribunal to consider whether the unfavourable treatment was because of something arising in consequence of the disability, not because of it.

The correct causation test could encompass several links in a chain of facts and more than one consequence of the disability could be taken into account. The Employment Tribunal had erred in adopting too narrow a test for causation and failing to consider other relevant consequences of the disability.  On the facts of the case, it was clear to the EAT that the disability, the perceived discriminatory treatment that gave rise to it and the Claimant’s reluctance to return to work were interlinked in such a way that could satisfy the broad test for a claim of discrimination arising from a disability.

The EAT also held that the Tribunal erred in its approach to the Claimant’s reasonable adjustments claim because the reasonable adjustments test was not a causation question. It required a comparison exercise with people who are not disabled, and so the Employment Tribunal had been wrong to require causation relating to the substantial disadvantage and medical evidence to prove it.

Our solicitors’ views on the case of Sheikholeslami v University of Edinburgh

Sacha Barrett, a Senior Associate in the employment department at Redmans, made the following comment on the case: “When preparing any disability discrimination case, it is important to think carefully about what the Claimant is and isn’t required to show in terms of causation.  This case clarifies that a looser connection involving more than one link in a chain of causation may be permitted for discrimination arising from a disability claims.’

The decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal in Sheikholeslami v University of Edinburgh UKEATS/0014/17/JW can be found here.

About

Redmans Employment Team deal with employment matters for both employers and employees, including drafting employment contracts and policies, advising employers and employees on compromise agreements, handling day-to-day HR issues, advising on restructures, and handling Employment Tribunal cases for both employers and employees Call 020 3397 3603 to speak to one of the members of our employment team or email us on enquiries@redmans.co.uk. Redmans have offices in Richmond, Chiswick, Hammersmith, Fulham, Kingston, Wimbledon, Ealing, Kings Cross and Marylebone (meetings strictly by appointment only).

Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your first name (required)

Your last name (required)

Your email (required)

Your telephone number (required)

Brief details of your enquiry

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk

Testimonials

4.75 Average

195 Reviews

Alkhas K

Excellent service.

Posted 5 days ago

Mathias G

Contacted them regarding my end of employment agreement. Chris Hadrill dealt with it and was done and handed back to employer same day more than happy with there service.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Mark W

Most professional from start to finish offering very a personal service. Most impressive and quick when dealing with the matters in hand.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Posted 1 month ago

submit

I am very glad I came across Redmans Solicitors. Fantastic service!

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Fantastic communication, always happy to answer queries, highly recommended.

Posted 1 month ago

Wavenie B

They were very straight to the point, friendly and understanding people. I felt they had my best interest. They were easy to get hold of, replies were almost instant. 5/5 for customer service

Posted 1 month ago

Christina P

Caroline was fantastic to work with - extremely knowledgeable, supportive, thorough and honest. I definitely recommend Redmans!

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Very well done and fast support. Professional and reliable. Highly recommended!

Posted 1 month ago

Helene L

They were very knowledgable in the respected area in terms of change in law/regulations that is crucial for the clients who are seeking for legal arvice.

Posted 1 month ago

Sara R

Very helpful and wonderful advice

Posted 1 month ago

Marie D

very good service all digitalised

Posted 1 month ago

Philip H

Chris Hadrill handled my case with great accuracy and efficiency. Basically made it feel like a process without hassle. Doesn't try to expand the case just for greater fees. I value his professional advice highly.

Posted 1 month ago

Michael W

Professional, responsive and supportive - excellent service!

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

I was really happy with the service provided. I had to chase a couple of time but despite that, my matter was dealt with in a timely manor. I would use again in the future

Posted 1 month ago

Lee M

Superb service and always available

Posted 2 months ago

Jonathan S

I was very grateful for the support I received from Redmans during a very difficult period. Rana Tandon really got under the skin of my issue and understood what was important to me, steering me carefully and sensibly to an outcome I was very happy with. I would recommend Redmans to anyone else without any reservations whatsoever.

Posted 2 months ago

Mohamed A

Super helpful and efficient, trustworthy service

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

efficient, responsive and effective

Posted 2 months ago

Andrew B

Very good service

Posted 2 months ago

Anonymous

Excellent service, compassionate and a good outcome

Posted 2 months ago