Ms C Knightley v Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judge | Mr Justice Linden |
| Neutral Citation | [2022] EAT 63 |
| Subject Matter | Not landmark |
| Court | Employment Appeal Tribunal |
| Published date | 26 April 2022 |
Judgment approved by the court Knightley v Chelsea & Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Page 1 [2022] EAT 63
© EAT 2022
Neutral Citation Number: [2022] EAT 63
Case No: EA-2020-000409-AS
EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
Rolls Building
Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL
Date: 9 November 2021
Before :
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE LINDEN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between :
MS C KNIGHTLEY Appellant
- and -
CHELSEA & WESTMINSTER HOSPITAL NHS FOUNDATION TRUST
Respondent
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr A Allen (instructed by Thompsons Solicitors LLP) for the Appellant
Mr B Jones (instructed by Capsticks Solicitors LLP) for the Respondent
Hearing date: 9 November 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
JUDGMENT
Judgment approved by the court Knightley v Chelsea & Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Page 2 [2022] EAT 63
© EAT 2022
SUMMARY
UNFAIR DISMISSAL AND DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
The Employment Tribunal found that the employer had failed to make a reasonable adjustment to its
procedure when dismissing the employee on grounds of capability in that it had not allowed her an
extension of time to lodge an appeal against her dismissal. It therefore upheld her claim under section
20 Equality Act 2010. However, it found that her dismissal was fair and proportionate, and therefore
dismissed her claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination arising out of disability, contrary to
section 15 Equality Act 2010.
The employee’s appeal was on the basis that the Tribunal’s finding, for the purposes of section 20 of
the 2010 Act, that the employee was unreasonably denied an opportunity to appeal against her
dismissal ought to have led to her other claims succeeding and/or that the Tribunal had not sufficiently
explained how her dismissal could be fair or proportionate given this finding and/or that the Tribunal
had wrongly relied on its finding that the employee’s appeal would not have been successful in any
event and had thereby committed the Polkey heresy.
Held: appeal dismissed. Discussion of the relationship between claims under sections 15 and 20 of
the 2010 Act and unfair dismissal claims.
To continue reading
Request your trial
1 cases
-
Mr B Garcha-Singh v British Airways Plc
...EAT 97 Judgment approved by the court for handing down Mr Garcha-Singh v British Airways Plc & Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2022] EAT 63; [2022] IRLR 567 accurately summarised of the effect of a failure to allow an opportunity to appeal a dismissal: “35. It will be noted that,......