Mr Donald Gabel v The Health and Safety Executive
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Lady Haldane |
| Court | Employment Appeal Tribunal |
| Published date | 06 March 2024 |
Judgment approved by the court for handing down Gabel v The Health and Safety Executive
Page 1 EA-2021-SCO-000069-DT
© EAT 2024
Neutral Citation Number: [2024] EAT 31
Case No: EA-2021-SCO-000069-DT
EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
52 Melville Street
Edinburgh EH3 7HF
Date: 05 March 2024
Before :
THE HONOURABLE LADY HALDANE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between :
MR DONALD GABEL Appellant
- and -
THE HEALTH AND SAFETY EXECUTIVE Respondent
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr Donald Gabel, the Appellant
Ms Lindsey Cartwright, for the Respondent
Hearing date: 21 November 2023
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
JUDGMENT
Judgment approved by the court for handing down Gabel v The Health and Safety Executive
Page 2 EA-2021-SCO-000069-DT
© EAT 2024
The Honourable Lady Haldane:
Introduction
1. The claimant appeals against a decision of the Employment Tribunal dated 8th July 2021 in
terms of which his claims for unlawful discrimination in terms of section 15 of the Equality
discrimination) and sections 20/21 EqA (Duty to make adjustments /failure to comply with the
duty) were dismissed. In order to engage those sections, the claimant required to establish that
the respondent was and is a qualifications body in respect of the post of diving supervisor for
the purposes of ss 53 and 54 of EqA. The Tribunal determined that the respondent was not a
qualifications body for that purpose, and nor was the position of diving supervisor a personal
office for the purposes of s 49 EqA.
2. This matter came before me for a full hearing on 21st November 2023. The claimant
represented himself, and the respondent was represented by Ms Cartwright. I had the benefit
of a full and detailed note of reasons for allowing the Full Hearing following an earlier
Preliminary Hearing. The Preliminary Hearing Judge explained that the grounds of appeal
were re-drafted and focussed into three succinct grounds following discussions between the
claimant and the Judge during the course of that hearing and it is those three grounds which
came before me for consideration.
Background
3. This claim is brought against the background of the legislation and codes of practice which
govern the diving industry in the UK. This framework is complex, and I am grateful to parties
for their respective efforts in seeking to elucidate and render these matters more readily
To continue reading
Request your trial