A manager of a company and the company itself were held liable for injury to feelings suffered by the claimant who alleged that she was discriminated against during her employment. She was pregnant and her working practices were not adjusted. The tribunal also held that she was subjected to inhumane treatment and bullying at work. An award of £25,000 was made for injury to feelings. The defendants appealed but the Court of Appeal established the sum was not unreasonable and the seriousness of the abuse was heightened as it also related to the wellbeing of the claimant’s unborn child.
Miles -v- Gilbank. Court of Appeal, 11 May 2006.
Judge criticised for taking expert’s report at face value
In assessing a claimant’ future loss of earnings based on a jointly instructed employment consultant’s report, the trial judge accepted the evidence of the consultant’s report that the claimant would have earned the average wage in his profession as a glazier. However, the expert’s report had previously stated that the claimant was very highly skilled and was likely to earn in the top centile for glaziers. Nevertheless, the trial judge only took the expert’s conclusions into account. Neither party called the expert to give oral evidence. The claimant appealed the decision. The Court of Appeal found that it was wrong for the judge to assume the expert’s summary was right and it was clear that he had made a mistake in his conclusion.
Woolley -v- Essex County Council. Court of Appeal, 17 May 2006.
Her Majesty’s Court Service
They have moved to:
Personal Injury Case Worker
HMCS Estates Directorate
Security and Safety Branch
4 Abbey Orchard Street
London SW1P 2JJ