The Latest from Cloisters
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has reserved its decision in the case of Chandhok v Tirkey concerning whether caste-based discrimination is prohibited under the Equality Act 2010.
Christopher Milsom, who appeared at first instance, led Tamar Burton in the first case heard by the EAT concerning caste-based discrimination. The Equality and Human Rights Commission was granted permission to intervene.
The simple answer is no.
In a case with both sides represented by Cloisters barristers, the President of the EAT (himself the ex-Head of Chambers) held that the test is exactly the same. The fundamental basis for an unfair dismissal claim lies in section 94. There is no reason for the automatic nature of the dismissal in s103A to modify the approach to territoriality.
Smania v Standard Chartered
This EAT case concerns the territorial scope of whistle-blowing involving a Claimant a banker working in Singapore for the Respondent.
The Claimant sought to argue that UK whistle-blowing protection applied to him when he made allegations of financial misconduct. The Respondent’s registered office is based in the UK and is regulated by both UK law along and relevant Asian regulation.