EAT rejects attempt to expand Jhuti principle to a group of decision-makers

Agarwal v Cardiff University UKEAT/0115/19/RN

19 March 2020: In dismissing the claimant clinical academic’s appeal against the judgment of the Cardiff tribunal, rejecting her claims of unfair dismissal and race discrimination, the EAT held that the tribunal had neither failed to adequately explain its rationale for upholding the fairness of the redundancy dismissal, nor had it erred in excluding the evidence of peripheral witnesses. The decision to dismiss C had been reached by a panel of decision-makers in accordance with the University’s statutes. HHJ Barklem rejected the claimant’s expanded Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti 2018 ICR 982 CA case that in order to establish whether or not the decision was tainted by unlawfulness, the tribunal was required to hear evidence from each member of the panel to reach an assessment as to his or her mental processes. Whilst the tribunal had not individually named all of the decision-makers who determined that her role was redundant, the claimant knew who they were. The ET did not err. David Mitchell represented Cardiff University, instructed by Eversheds Sutherland LLP

23rd March 2020