0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

post-termination victimisation confirmed as unlawful

28 February 2014

The Court of Appeal has held that post-termination victimisation is unlawful under the Equality Act 2010 in Jessemy v Rowstock Ltd. Mr Jessemy had brought tribunal proceedings including age discrimination. The employment tribunal found that Rowstock Ltd had provided a detrimental employment reference as a result of Mr Jessemy pursuing the tribunal proceedings but was unable to provide a remedy due to the wording of the Equality Act.

Strangely, s108(7) of the Act appeared to expressly exclude post-employment victimisation, despite such protection being required by EU law. The protection had already been established by case law and there was no indication that there was an intention to change that under the Equality Act.

The Court of Appeal held that the Act contains a drafting error; that the claim must succeed and remitted the case back to the tribunal to assess compensation.

Employers should be mindful of the risks when supplying references for employees who have issued discrimination proceedings against them.

related opinions

World Menopause Day

To mark this, ACAS has produced new guidance for managing the menopause at work, providing advice on the symptoms and potential impact of the menopause and the types of support that can be offered.

View blog

Sexual Harassment in the workplace – consequences of getting it wrong

A partner at a Magic Circle law firm has this week been ordered to pay £235,000 in fines and costs by a disciplinary tribunal, having been found guilty of breaching his professional obligations.

View blog

High Court finds against WASPI women

The High Court has rejected the judicial review claim brought by the campaign group BackTo60 against the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP).

View blog

When does misconduct by a professional amount to professional misconduct?

The Court of Appeal has considered what amounts to professional conduct for the purposes of the MHPS in the case of Idu –v- The East Suffolk & North Essex NHS Foundation Trust.
The allegations raised against the Appellant surgeon included, amongst others, refusals to follow management instructions and inappropriate (rude, uncivil, and, on occasions, aggressive) verbal and written communications.

View blog

mailing list sign up



Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up