| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Eagle Place Services Ltd v Rudd ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Eagle Place Services Ltd v Rudd
''Eagle Place Services Ltd v Rudd'' () IRLR 486 ((EAT )) is a UK labour law case, concerning disability discrimination.〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Eagle Place Services Ltd & Ors v Rudd () UKEAT 0497_08_2509 (25 September 2009) )〕
==Facts==
Mr Rudd was a solicitor with detached retinas, and disabled within the meaning of the DDA 1995, working for law firm Nabarro as a senior associate, but employed by Eagle Place Services Ltd. Agreed adjustments to accommodate his disability were that some days he could work at home. This went well through a trial period. But eventually he was dismissed by the head of human resources, Ms Celia Staples, after he had allegedly asked for a raise to benefit from an insurance claim, threatened to sue for constructive dismissal otherwise and refused inspection of IT equipment at his house. The tribunal rejected Ms Celia Staples evidence as being unreliable, and found that on the contrary, the reason for dismissal was Nabarro was concerned about the cost of adjustments.
Nabarro appealed and contended the proper comparator was a lawyer of the same grade and skills who needed to work 2 days at home, and that such a person would not be dismissed. Running the “bastard defence”, Eagle Place Services acknowledged they acted unfairly but a hypothetical non-disabled comparator would have been treated no differently since, in large law firms, it was normal to manage dismissals by summarily dismissing highly paid employees, in the expectation that an amicable settlement would follow.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Eagle Place Services Ltd v Rudd」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|