Lots of updates in the MMD this week.

The start of a new month and a new financial year for many. We have a couple of case law updates this month focusing on procedural errors and the correct approach to assessing loss. Our video update features on refusing a subject access request, and please read on for details of awareness sessions we are hosting in partnership with Mental Health First Aid.  We also have an article from our Litigation Team on Landlords’ consent to assign a lease.

 The Media Hub

Nils O’Donoghue has prepared the following video on subject access requests.

To watch this week’s video, please click here.

There have been lots of relevant employment law/HR updates this week.

Dismissal following homophobic remarks was unfair due to investigation flaws

The Claimant worked for a firm of Solicitors as a legal secretary. The Claimant was dismissed by the firm after a colleague complained about her homophobic comments. In 2013, the Claimant had been given a warning for racist remarks however when asked about these comments at the disciplinary hearing, the Claimant said she could not remember. The disciplinary manager concluded that the Claimant was not being honest in her recollections and was dismissed following the meeting. The tribunal described as the comments “unpleasant” and “blameworthy,” however did consider her very traditional upbringing including in relation to the role of women in society. The tribunal ultimately found that during the disciplinary investigation, the firm had relied too heavily on the Claimant’s failure to recollect previous instances of inappropriate behaviour rather than the specific allegations made regarding the homophobic comments. The judge rendered the dismissal unfair, however due to the nature of her comments, the judge ordered that the Claimant’s basic and compensatory award should be reduced by 75% to reflect her culpability in her dismissal.

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/ms-s-rootes-v-edward-harte-solicitors-2300083-slash-2022

A tribunal was wrong to reduce compensation on a percentage basis

The tribunal had made a number of findings against the Claimant, including the finding that the Claimant had failed to mitigate his losses. As a result of this, the tribunal made the decision to reduce compensation for his loss of past earnings by 50%. The Claimant appealed this decision and the EAT found that the tribunal failed to direct itself on the principles of mitigation including the reasonableness of the Claimant’s failure to mitigate. The EAT noted that the percentage reduction was not appropriate in this case as there was sufficient evidence to assess the balance of probabilities. The EAT remitted the question of mitigation and past loss to the Tribunal for a rehearing.

https://www.gov.uk/employment-appeal-tribunal-decisions/mr-j-edward-v-tavistock-and-portman-nhs-trust-2023-eat-33

Mental Health Awareness Sessions

In partnership with Mental Health First Aid, we are providing the opportunity to attend one of the mental health training sessions listed below. The sessions are delivered by accredited MHFA England Instructor Members and will help you gain a better understanding of mental health in a range of areas.  Please find the relevant information relating to the sessions below and let us know if you wish to attend.

Supporting Mental Health in the Workplace_

Adult MHFA Two Day only flyer – instructor

 MHFA England Adult Courses

1. 27/28th June 2023
2. 26/27th September 2023
3. 28/29th November 2023

Supporting Mental Health in the Workplace Course – For Managers (Non Accredited Course)

1. 29th September 2023

Stress and Resilience Course – Cme Accredited

1. 29th June 2023
2. 30th November 2023

Focus On – Litigation

This week, Kaye Willis from our litigation team has prepared an article on a landlord’s consent to assign a lease. Please see the article below.

landlords consent to assign a lease reasonable or unreasonable