Supreme Court invokes EU Equality Directive to disapply common law judicial immunity from suit in disability discrimination claim by police officer

10/11/17, Public Law

P, a police officer, was dismissed from the force for gross misconduct following a hearing before a police misconduct panel constituted under the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2008.  P brought an unsuccessful appeal against that finding to the Police Appeals Tribunal.  She then brought a disability discrimination claim before the Employment Tribunal but the claim was dismissed because the misconduct hearing had been conducted by a tribunal which enjoyed the common law judicial immunity from suit.   The Employment Appeal Tribunal, then the Court of Appeal, upheld that decision applying the decision of the Court of Appeal in Heath v. Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2004] EWCA Civ 943, [2005] ICR 329.  On appeal the Supreme Court overturned the decision, remitting the case to the Employment Tribunal for determination of P’s discrimination claim on the merits.  The common law judicial immunity from suit was incompatible with P’s rights under EU law, in particular the right to equality of treatment in the Equality Framework Directive which confers on all persons, including police officers, a directly effective right to be treated in accordance with the principle of equal treatment in relation to employment and working conditions, including dismissals: article 3(1)(c).  While the Equality Act 2010 conferred on police officers the same right to bring discrimination claims as other employees and by s 42 they are deemed to be the employees of the chief officer, the Act does not expressly disapply the judicial immunity from suit enjoyed by a police misconduct panel.  The Court of Appeal, applying Heath, had held that in the absence of express words the common law immunity from suit barred P’s claim.  The Supreme Court, overturning the Court of Appeal’s decision, accepted the argument run by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, who intervened on the appeal, that s 42 must be read and given effect consistently with the Equality Directive under the Marleasing principle so that a police officer is deemed to be the employee of the persons conducting a misconduct hearing for the purposes of bringing a discrimination claim.  The judicial immunity from suit was thus expressly disapplied by operation of the revised s 42.

A copy of the judgment is here.

A copy of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s press statement is here.

Press coverage of the case by The Guardian can be found here.

Paul Bowen QC acted for the Equality and Human Rights Commission which intervened on the appeal to the Supreme Court.

« Back to news listings

About cookies on our website

Following a revised EU directive on website cookies, each company based, or doing business, in the EU is required to notify users about the cookies used on their website.

Our site uses cookies to improve your experience of certain areas of the site and to allow the use of specific functionality like social media page sharing. You may delete and block all cookies from this site, but as a result parts of the site may not work as intended.

To find out more about what cookies are, which cookies we use on this website and how to delete and block cookies, please see our Which cookies we use page.

Click on the button below to accept the use of cookies on this website (this will prevent the dialogue box from appearing on future visits)