In the case of Kelly v PGA European Tour Mr Scott Kelly was unfairly dismissed from his post as Group Marketing Director for the PGA European Tour. He had been employed by the company for 26 years and his remit was to expand its marketing department and commercial partnerships. He performed that role successfully and became Group Marketing Director in 2015 and had overall responsibility for the PGA European Tour’s commercial operations.
A new chairman was appointed in May 2014 and a strategic review was carried out by business consultants. In April 2015, the appointment of Mr Keith Pelley as the new chief executive officer was announced. Mr Pelley had two meetings with Mr Kelly. He told him that he would like him to consider retiring at the end of the year but to continue his relationship by becoming a consultant on a tournament in Morocco.
Mr Kelly was subsequently dismissed via letter with effect from 30 October 2015 and brought a complaint in the employment tribunal alleging that he had been unfairly dismissed and discriminated against on grounds of his age. He sought re-instatement or re-engagement. The ET held, however, that he had not been dismissed by reason of his age. The tribunal ordered that he be re-engaged in the vacant role of Commercial Director, China.
Mr Kelly sought a reconsideration of the decision contending, amongst other things, that the employer should also have disclosed the existence of other comparable or suitable positions which had already been filled prior to the remedies hearing. That request was refused by the ET. The EAT allowed an appeal against the order for re-engagement.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The EAT correctly held that the ET had erred by ordering the company to re-engage Mr Kelly when he did not meet one of the essential requirements of the role, namely to speak, write and read Mandarin.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
