BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Greig v. Fife Council [2004] UKEAT 0021_04_2906 (29 June 2004)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2004/0021_04_2906.html
Cite as: [2004] UKEAT 0021_04_2906, [2004] UKEAT 21_4_2906

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

BAILII case number: [2004] UKEAT 0021_04_2906
Appeal No. EATS/0021/04

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
52 MELVILLE STREET, EDINBURGH EH3 7HF
             At the Tribunal
             On 29 June 2004

Before

THE HONOURABLE LORD JOHNSTON

MR A J RAMSDEN

MISS G B LENAGHAN


JAMES GREIG APPELLANT

FIFE COUNCIL RESPONDENT

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

© Copyright 2004

    APPEARANCES
     

     

    For the Appellant Mr J Greig, In Person
    13 Broom Gardens
    KIRKCALDY
    KY2 6YZ
     







    For the Respondents







     






    Mrs S MacKessack, Solicitor
    Of-
    Fife Council
    Law & Administration Service
    Fife House
    North Street
    GLENROTHES KY7 5LT
     
    SUMMARY
    DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
    Whether discrimination on grounds of disability in relation to selection to a post

     
    LORD JOHNSTON:
  1. The appellant employee appealed against a decision of the Employment Tribunal sitting in Edinburgh in respect of a claim for discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. His complaint was that he was not selected for a particular post and he claims that was on the grounds of his disability. Despite lodging extensive grounds of appeal, which are not always easy to follow, before us, Mr Greig made three short submissions.

  2. He first submitted that the Tribunal had made no primary findings of fact. He secondly submitted that the Tribunal had gone beyond the original reason put forward for the decision not to award the post to Mr Greig, and, thirdly, he complained that the proper comparator was the people shortlisted for the post.

  3. We are unable to accept any of these propositions. It is plain that the Tribunal studied the evidence and reached conclusions on fact. The reason they give primarily for the decision was that everybody was treated the same as regards criteria for the post and there was no evidence that Mr Greig's disability played any part in the exercise. The third submission is entirely without merit given the findings of the Tribunal.

  4. In these circumstances we do not consider this appeal has any substance and it will be dismissed.

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2004/0021_04_2906.html