Employment Appeal Tribunal Upholds Dismissal Decision in Disability Discrimination Case
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has dismissed Mr. Khakimov's appeal against a prior tribunal's ruling concerning his claims of disability discrimination and unfair dismissal.
• public
Employment Appeal Tribunal Rejects Key Grounds in Disability Discrimination Appeal
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has dismissed an appeal brought by Mr. Saidali Khakimov against Amova Asset Management UK Limited (formerly Nikko Asset Management Europe Ltd). The appeal concerned the rejection of his claims for disability-related discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 and unfair dismissal.
Tribunal Upholds Original Findings
The EAT found that the original Employment Tribunal (ET) had correctly applied the relevant legal tests. Specifically, the tribunal had found no requisite causal link between Mr. Khakimov's dismissal and the "something arising" from his disability. The ET had also permissibly concluded that, even if the link were established, the dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
Key to the appeal were arguments concerning the definition of "something arising" from Mr. Khakimov's disability. The ET had relied on an agreed list of issues, which had been the subject of extensive correspondence and preliminary hearings. The claimant's counsel sought to introduce a broader interpretation of "something arising" during closing submissions, but the ET rightly rejected this late attempt to reframe the case.
Furthermore, the EAT found no basis to disturb the ET's alternative conclusion that the dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, nor the finding that the dismissal fell within the band of reasonable responses. These conclusions were well-supported by the ET's factual findings and detailed reasoning.
Procedural Issues Addressed
The claimant also sought to amend his grounds of appeal to introduce a new point concerning a "serious procedural irregularity." However, the EAT refused this application, citing an inadequate explanation for the late submission and finding the proposed new ground to be not fairly arguable.
The EAT emphasised the importance of adhering to agreed lists of issues and noted that parties have a responsibility to clearly identify the claims they wish to pursue. The tribunal's role is arbitral, not inquisitorial, and it is not expected to proactively suggest or expand upon a party's case.
In summary, the EAT dismissed Mr. Khakimov's appeal, upholding the original tribunal's decision that his dismissal was not unlawfully discriminatory or unfair.
Read the entire judgment here: Khakimov v Amova Asset Management UK Ltd (formerly “Nikko Asset Management Europe Ltd”) EAT 47
