Mr D Taheri v Aprite (GB) Limited t/a Westway Nissan — 2019

At the Manchester hearing on 11 and 12 September 2019 before Employment Judge Franey, with Mr J Flynn and Mrs C Clover, Mr D Taheri alleged direct age, race and disability discrimination after his participation in a sales recruitment assessment day on 25 May 2018 was ended by Aprite (GB) Limited t/a Westway Nissan. At the start of the hearing he withdrew the race complaint, which the Tribunal recorded as dismissed upon withdrawal. The remaining claims were direct age discrimination and direct disability discrimination, with prostate cancer relied on as the disability.

The Tribunal found that the decision to end the claimant's participation was made by Mr White and Mr Buswell because of his behaviour on the day, not because of age or disability. It found that he twice approached Mr Kingswood about the air conditioning, with the second approach being confrontational and rude, that he interrupted Mr White's presentation, and that he tried to lead the group exercise in a way the assessors regarded as disruptive. It also found that he did not tell Mr Kingswood about prostate cancer at the assessment day, so the managers who decided to exclude him did not know of that condition. Applying s.136 Equality Act 2010 and the authorities it cited, including Igen v Wong, Madarassy v Nomura International PLC and Hewage v Grampian Health Board, the Tribunal held that the disability claim failed and that the age claim also failed because age played no part in the decision.

After the liability decision, the Tribunal heard a costs application. It held that the claimant acted unreasonably in pursuing the case after receiving the respondent's 4 February 2019 letter and ordered him to pay the respondent's legal costs incurred after 8 February 2019. The amount was not fixed in the judgment: it was to be determined by detailed assessment by an Employment Judge under rule 78(1)(b), with regard to the claimant's ability to pay and the fact that his house was on the market.