UKEAT/0290/07/LA

Key Facts

On 11th and 12th April 2007 there was a hearing in the Southampton Employment Tribunal to determine whether or not the Claimant had suffered disability discrimination within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

The Claimant complained that after the conclusion of the hearing on the second day (when the Tribunal had reserved its decision) he was subject to threats and abuse by one of the Respondent’s employees, (who owned the Respondent through a parent company), outside the lifts at the Southampton Employment Tribunal. The Claimant sought to raise these issues as a separate cause of action. The Employment Tribunal had originally held that such threats could not be actionable because they were protected by judicial immunity. This doctrine attaches to things said in the course of judicial proceedings, so as to not hinder the honesty and integrity of evidence in the Court process. The EAT however overturned that decision by the Tribunal, holding that conversations outside the lift did not form any part of the proceedings and that the close proximity of the lifts to the Court room did not mean that the alleged behaviour outside the Court room could be protected. It further went on to find that such behaviour could potentially form the basis of a victimisation claim under the Employment Discrimination legislation.

Comment

The case is a reminder to all litigants whether Claimants or Respondents to behave in a dignified manner outside (and hopefully inside!) the Tribunal Court Room. This case has made clear that failure to do so could in itself create a separate cause of action against the employer.