Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Case round-up

by Personnel Today 28 Jan 2003
by Personnel Today 28 Jan 2003

This week’s case round-up

Additional compensation
Singh v University Hospital NHS Trust EAT 1409/01

Singh, a hospital porter, was absent from work for an extended period
following surgery. On his return to work, however, he had a number of
altercations with his manager, which Singh believed to be racially motivated. A
tribunal upheld his subsequent claim of race discrimination.

When considering appropriate compensation, however, although the tribunal
awarded Singh lost earnings and compensation for injury to feelings it declined
to award him additional, aggravated damages. The Employment Appeal Tribunal
rejected his appeal, but clarified the principles upon which tribunals should
rely when considering whether aggravated compensation is appropriate:

– It can be appropriate in discrimination cases

– It is only ever relevant where the discriminator has acted in a
high-handed, malicious, insulting or oppressive manner. Stress or injury to the
victim is not, of itself, sufficient

– The tribunal will need to determine whether conduct meets the above
criteria on the individual facts of the case

– Aggravated compensation may be included in awards for injury to feelings
or be dealt with separately. It is not dictated by the level or category of
injury to feelings awards

– The award should be compensatory and not punitive

Can a competitive interview be discrimitary?
Archibald v Fife Council, EATS/0025/02

For a number of years, Archibald worked at the council as a road sweeper, a
grade 1 position. Following surgery, however, she had mobility difficulties and
was deemed ‘disabled’ within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act
1995. She could not continue in a road sweeper role.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Despite having undertaken a number of administrative courses during her
sickness absence, the alternative, sedentary posts for which Archibald put
herself forward at the council, were all of higher grades. She also lacked
relevant clerical experience. As a result, after in excess of 100 internal
applications, Archibald had not secured an alternative position. She
accordingly brought a tribunal claim against the council alleging that, as a
disabled person, the council failed to make reasonable adjustments for her
disability by subjecting her to competitive interview.

Both the Employment Tribunal and the Employment Appeal Tribunal, disagreed,
however. While insisting that competitive interviews fell within an
‘arrangement’ for the purposes of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and
could potentially be discriminatory, here it was not. All job applicants were
subjected to the same process. The council was justified in wanting to obtain
the best person for the relevant job and had approached the selection process
in a fair and even-handed manner.

Personnel Today

Personnel Today articles are written by an expert team of award-winning journalists who have been covering HR and L&D for many years. Some of our content is attributed to "Personnel Today" for a number of reasons, including: when numerous authors are associated with writing or editing a piece; or when the author is unknown (particularly for older articles).

previous post
Met targets Chinese New Year for recruitment drive
next post
Review recommends role for HR on boards

You may also like

Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders receive 400% pay rise

4 Jul 2025

FCA to extend misconduct rules beyond banks

2 Jul 2025

‘Decisive action’ needed to boost workers’ pensions

2 Jul 2025

Business leaders’ drop in confidence impacts headcount

2 Jul 2025

Why we need to rethink soft skills in...

1 Jul 2025

Five misconceptions about hiring refugees

20 Jun 2025

Forward features list 2025 – submitting content to...

23 Nov 2024

Features list 2021 – submitting content to Personnel...

1 Sep 2020

Large firms have no plans to bring all...

26 Aug 2020

A typical work-from-home lunch: crisps

24 Aug 2020

  • Empowering working parents and productivity during the summer holidays SPONSORED | Businesses play a...Read more
  • AI is here. Your workforce should be ready. SPONSORED | From content creation...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+