- Victimisation in recruitment: what amounts to detriment and how compensation is assessed (NHS Trust Development Authority and North Cumbria University Hospitals NHS Trust v Saiger, 2nd report)
- Original news
- What is the impact of this judgment?
- What is the relevant background law?
- Victimisation and the detriment it causes
- Assessing compensation in a prohibited conduct claim
- What were the facts?
- What did the employment tribunal decide?
- What did the EAT decide?
- Case details
Employment analysis: Where an employer has victimised a job applicant by removing her from further consideration for recruitment, that act will amount to actionable detriment even in circumstances that it is found she definitely would not, in the absence of the victimisation, have been offered the job due to her unsuitability for it, according to the EAT. In assessing compensation in such circumstances, the tribunal must ask what would have happened had the unlawful victimisation not occurred; it is not required to speculate as to what would have happened if the original protected act done by the job applicant, which gave rise to the motivation for the victimisation, had also never occurred.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial