In this case we look at the decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in Taylor v XLN Telecom Limited. This case concerned a black, male employee who joined the respondent company in 2006. Shortly after joining, he was promoted to Team Leader, subject to a probationary period of three months. This period was extended following concerns about his performance. The employee later lodged a grievance and whilst this was in the process of being heard, also made complaints about his manager’s racially offensive conduct towards him. Following the rejection of the grievance, the employee was suspended and then dismissed. He bought a claim for unfair dismissal and victimisation.
Initially, the Employment Tribunal adopted the approach taken in Skyrail Oceanic Limited v Coleman and rejected the employee’s claims for injury to feelings, injury to health and aggravated damages resulting from the victimisation. The basis for this finding was because the employee had failed to show that these injuries were attributable to the knowledge that his dismissal was an act of unlawful victimisation. Rather, it seemed the case that he was aggrieved as a result of the employer’s failure to comply with the (then statutory) grievance and disciplinary procedures.
However, the EAT held that the Tribunal was wrong in its approach and applied the same principles as for a claim brought in tort, that is, that a victim is compensated for the consequences of the wrongful act, irrespective of his or her knowledge of the facts which constituted the tort. The EAT also distinguished this case from Skyrail on the fact that the employee in Skyrail was only claiming for injury to feelings and in Taylor the employee also suffered an injury to health, namely depression. Injury to health, as opposed to injury to feelings, should be dealt with by applying the principles used in personal injury compensation so that knowledge of the reason for dismissal is irrelevant. Accordingly, the claim was remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration.