The full text of the judgment in this case is available free of charge on the BAILII website
Representation:
Mr Thomas Linden QC and Mr James Laddie instructed by BP Collins, Solicitors, Collins House, 32-38 Station Road, Gerrards Cross, Bucks SL9 8EL for Dr Kuzel
Mr John Bowers QC and Mr Jeremy Lewis instructed by Clarkslegal LLP, Solicitors, One Forbury Square, The Forbury, Reading, Berks RG1 3EB for Roche Products Ltd
Authority for the proposition that:-
- in an unfair dismissal case it is for the employer to show the reason for the dismissal (Employment Rights Act 1996 s.98). If the employee asserts there was a different reason he must produce at least some evidence to support that assertion.
- it is not correct to say, either as a matter of law or logic, that a Tribunal must find that if the reason was not that asserted by the employer, then it must have been for the reason asserted by the employee.
editor's notes:
The Court of Appeal specifically agreed with the EAT's analysis of the burden of proof in this type of case (see Kuzel v Roche Products Ltd EAT 2007 ) but it came to a different conclusion on applying that analysis to the facts.
On 30th July 2008 the House of Lords refused Dr Kuzel permission to appeal: see [2009] ICR 253.
For relevant general notes see Whistleblowing /a general note and/or Unfair dismissal/burden of proof
FINISH>
prepared April2008