Sheikh v. ADT (Tyco) Fire and Security

An Employment Tribunal does not err in law by rejecting a discrimination claim concerning promotion where its findings establish that the claimant did not complete the employer's required appraisal and grade-test process, and the evidence does not support a discriminatory reason for the failure to progress. Reasons must be read with the findings as a whole. They are sufficient where they provide a full answer to the live complaint and enable the parties to understand why it failed.

The claimant appealed against the Employment Tribunal's dismissal of claims of race discrimination, disability discrimination and victimisation. The appeal concerned one surviving issue: whether the Tribunal had failed to address his contention that he had repeatedly requested appraisals and that the respondent's records could identify employees promoted ahead of him.

The Tribunal had found that the claimant received an appraisal in 2012, did not seek a second appraisal, and never took the grade test required for a grade increase. The central issue was whether those findings and the Tribunal's reasons disclosed an error of law or inadequate reasons.

1. Appeal dismissed. The Employment Tribunal made findings it was entitled to make: the claimant had one appraisal, did not thereafter request a further appraisal, and did not take the grade test which was a prerequisite to a grade increase.
2. The drafted ground, which asserted that the Tribunal failed to take account of requests for appraisals, could not succeed in light of those findings. The Employment Appeal Tribunal rejected the attempt to reargue factual matters or rely on material outside the permitted ground of appeal.
3. The further matters raised at the Rule 3(10) hearing also disclosed no error. The relevant task was not to determine generally why the claimant had remained at grade 4. It was to decide whether the evidence permitted an inference, absent an explanation, that his lack of progression was because of disability. The claimant had to establish a prima facie case, including evidence of less favourable treatment by appropriate comparators.
4. The Tribunal's findings supplied a full answer. It had found a skills gap in basic computer skills, the claimant's failure to take the required steps after appraisal, and that the grievance officers' decision not to investigate promotion back to 2006 was unrelated to discrimination. Its reasons therefore adequately explained why this aspect of the claim failed and were not deficient under Meek.

• Employment Appeal Tribunal: Appeal dismissed.
• Employment Tribunal, London (South): Following a four-day hearing in June 2017, the Tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims of race discrimination, disability discrimination and victimisation. Reasons were sent to the parties on 20 July 2017.