In Nagra v Unipart Group Ltd, the claimant worked for Unipart through a recruitment agency, RE People. He brought claims including unfair dismissal, sex discrimination, harassment and equal pay. He argued that a separate company, Supply Chain Coordination Ltd (SCCL), employed him and that Unipart was liable as SCCL’s agent. He denied having a contract with RE People.
At a case management hearing, the judge explained that a principal can be liable for discrimination against a contract worker supplied by another organisation. The claimant did not adopt that alternative route and continued to argue that SCCL employed him.
At a later preliminary hearing, the claimant chose not to give evidence. The tribunal found that the agency arrangement was genuine and reflected the parties’ relationship. It rejected his case against SCCL and Unipart, including his argument that the arrangement had materially changed when he moved into a different role. The claims were dismissed.
The EAT dismissed the appeal. It accepted that the possibility of a claim against Unipart as the hirer was apparent from the pleadings. However, the tribunal had addressed this at the earlier case management hearing by explaining the alternative route to the claimant.
Tribunals must assist litigants in person where fairness requires, which can include identifying an apparent issue and seeking clarification. But they have a wide margin of appreciation and must remain impartial. They cannot...
The rapper's agency said recent allegations shared online were fabricated, and filed a criminal complaint against the accuser. Rapper Yang Hong-won's agency has denied allegations that he cheated o...