Qu v Landis & Gyr Ltd (Rev 1)

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL At the Tribunal On 20 February 2019 Judgment delivered on 8 March 2019 Before

There is considerable overlap in the points raised by these grounds and as Soole J observed in granting permission to proceed, the central challenge is to the Employment Tribunal's approach and conclusion as to the appropriate period for future loss of earnings and benefits, including pension, bonus and holiday benefits. Since that Order, there are additional grounds raised in relation to the Reconsideration Decision.

(i) Unlike Mr Chagger, although the Claimant had difficulty in obtaining suitable alternative employment for a period following his dismissal, in April 2016 he succeeded in obtaining a permanent position as Senior Electronics Engineer albeit with a lower remuneration package. That employment was ongoing at the date of the Remedy Hearing. There was insufficient evidence for the Employment Tribunal to conclude whether it was or was not as secure as his employment with the Respondent.

(ii) There is no finding that the Claimant suffered any sort of stigma damage such as was recognised in Chagger .

(iii) Further, given the Respondent's genuine performance concerns in his case, the Employment Tribunal expressly found that demotion would have been possible as an alternative to the discriminatory dismissal.