Mrs S Steer v Stormsure Ltd
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Mr Justice Cavanagh |
| Subject Matter | Not landmark |
| Court | Employment Appeal Tribunal |
| Published date | 21 December 2020 |
Copyright 2020
Appeal No. UKEAT/0216/20/AT (V)
EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
ROLLS BUILDING, 7 ROLLS BUILDINGS, FETTER LANE, LONDON, EC4A 1NL
At the Tribunal
On 15 December 2020
Judgment handed down on 21 December 2020
Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CAVANAGH
(SITTING ALONE)
MRS S STEER APPELLANT
STORMSURE LIMITED RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
UKEAT/0216/20/AT
APPEARANCES
For the Appellant
MR CHRISTOPHER MILSOM
(of Counsel)
Instructed by:
Bindmans LLP
236 Grays Inn Road
London
WC1X 8HB
For the Respondent
MR JAMES McHUGH
(of Counsel)
Instructed by:
Markel Law LLP
Interchange
81-85 Station Road
Croydon
CR0 2AJ
UKEAT/0216/20/AT
SUMMARY
SEX DISCRIMINATION, HUMAN RIGHTS, JURISDICTIONAL/TIM E POINTS AND
VICTIMISATION.
The Appellant has presented a claim in the Employment Tribunal in which she alleges that she
was dismissed by the Respondent and that the dismissal amounted t o sex discrimination and/or
victimisation on the ground that she had done a protected act, contrary to the Equality Act 2010.
She appeals against the Employment Tribunal’s refusal to permit her to apply for interim relief.
The Appellant accepts that no such right appears on the face of the Equality Act 2010.
However, she says that the right to claim interim relief must be read into the Equality Act 2010,
because this is required by European Law and/or by the European Convention on Human
Rights (“ECHR”), and/or that such a right should be granted by giving horizontal direct effect
to fundamental principles of EU law.
European Law
The Appellant relies on three grounds relating to European Law. The first two are that the
failure of domestic law to provide interim relief in discrimination/victimisation cases relating to
dismissal contravenes the EU law principles of effectiveness and equivalence. She says this
should be remedied by the application of a conforming interpretation to the Equality Act 2010,
by reading in words to the Act, granting a right to c laim interim relief in dismissal c ases. The
Appellant’s third contention is that the failu re to provide interim relief in cases such as this is in
breach of fundamental principles of EU law and, in particular, Articles 15 and 47 of the EU
Charter, and that these principles should be given horizontal direct effect by reading appropriate
wording into the Equality Act 2010 so as to provide a right to claim interim relief.
Effectiveness. The absence of a right to claim interim relief in discrimination/victimisation
cases relating to dismissal does not infringe the EU law principle of effectiveness. Domestic
To continue reading
Request your trial