Acts
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Search Results for: Disability Discrimination Act 1995 3A
Countrywide Estate Agents (Unlimited) and Another v Rice: EAT 26 Nov 2008
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION Disability related discrimination Direct disability discrimination The Employment Tribunal confused the relevant tests for disability discrimination under s.3A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as amended. Case remitted to the Employment Tribunal to consider the issue of disability discrimination in the light of the judgment and London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm … Continue reading Countrywide Estate Agents (Unlimited) and Another v Rice: EAT 26 Nov 2008
Cordell v Foreign and Commonwealth Office: EAT 5 Oct 2011
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable Adjustments Appellant, who is deaf, employed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office – FCO declines to post her to Kazakhstan because of the problems, and in particular the cost (about andpound;230,000 p.a.), of providing English-speaking lipspeaker support – Brings claims of direct discrimination under section 3A (5) of the Disability … Continue reading Cordell v Foreign and Commonwealth Office: EAT 5 Oct 2011
N, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Independent Appeal Panel: CA 24 Feb 2009
The case of Malcolm has overruled Novacold. Toulson LJ said: ‘In Malcolm the House of Lords was concerned with the construction of the same phrase in Part III of the Act. It overruled the decision in Clark v Novacold and held that the proper comparator was someone who had behaved in the same way as … Continue reading N, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Independent Appeal Panel: CA 24 Feb 2009
Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary: CA 24 Jun 2008
The claimant renewed her application for leave to appeal. She had been a probationary constable, but after various injuries came to suffer disability, preventing her being able to carry out the routine activities of as constable, and her employment had been terminated. The tribunal, having found her to be disabled, found also that the discrimination … Continue reading Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary: CA 24 Jun 2008
Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary: EAT 6 Dec 2007
EAT Disability discrimination – Reasonable adjustmentsThe Tribunal found that the Chief Constable was entitled to terminate the services of a probationary constable who could not successfully complete her probationary period because certain disabilities prevented her from carrying out duties in a confrontational setting. It was not a reasonable adjustment to expect the Chief Constable to … Continue reading Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary: EAT 6 Dec 2007
High Quality Lifestyles Ltd v Watts: EAT 10 Apr 2006
EAT The Employment Tribunal had erred in its construction of direct discrimination under s3A(5) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as amended when it failed to construct a correct hypothetical comparator for the Claimant who was an HIV+ care worker dismissed because of the risk of transmission to users of the Respondent’s health care facilities. … Continue reading High Quality Lifestyles Ltd v Watts: EAT 10 Apr 2006
Wilcox v Birmingham Cab Services Ltd: EAT 23 Jun 2011
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Direct disability discriminationDISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Reasonable adjustmentsUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissalClaimant, working as a debt adviser, suffers from agoraphobia and travel anxiety – Resigns when Respondent refuses to move her to bureau closer to her home on a guaranteed permanent basis – Tribunal dismisses claim under section 3A (2) of Disability … Continue reading Wilcox v Birmingham Cab Services Ltd: EAT 23 Jun 2011
Eagle Place Services Ltd and Others v Rudd: EAT 25 Sep 2009
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATIONDirect disability discriminationDisability related discriminationThe Claimant, who was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, was employed as a solicitor by the Respondent, the service company of a well know firm of solicitors. Reasonable adjustments were agreed to facilitate the Claimant’s working. These proved satisfactory and enabled the Claimant to … Continue reading Eagle Place Services Ltd and Others v Rudd: EAT 25 Sep 2009
Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd: EAT 6 Mar 2003
EAT Sex Discrimination – Inferring DiscriminationThe claimant sought compenstion for sex discrimination. She appealed a finding of a material factor justifying the difference in pay. Held: The new provisions included reference to the Code of Practice issued by the Equal Opportunities Commission, which provided that the employer should provide a transparent system for setting pay … Continue reading Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd: EAT 6 Mar 2003
Williams v J Walter Thompson Group Ltd: CA 17 Feb 2005
In giving their decision, the court reminded tribunals when preparing their judgments, to make sure the reasons were user friendly. Here time had been wasted with confusion about the Roman Numerals used to number the reasons. Judges: Mummery LJ, Chadwick LJ, Tuckey LJ Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 133, Times 05-Apr-2005, [2005] IRLR 376 Links: Bailii … Continue reading Williams v J Walter Thompson Group Ltd: CA 17 Feb 2005
Smith v Churchills Stairlifts Plc: CA 27 Oct 2005
Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 1220, [2006] ICR 524, [2006] IRLR 41 Links: Bailii Statutes: Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – High Quality Lifestyles Ltd v Watts EAT 10-Apr-2006 EAT The Employment Tribunal had erred in its construction of direct discrimination under s3A(5) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 as … Continue reading Smith v Churchills Stairlifts Plc: CA 27 Oct 2005
JP Morgan Europe Ltd v Chweidan: EAT 26 Aug 2010
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATIONDisability related discriminationDirect disability discriminationThe Employment Tribunal found that the Claimant, an Executive Director in Structured Credit and Sales, had not suffered disability related discrimination under s3A(1) of the 1995 Disability Discrimination Act, by reason of the fact that his disability limited his working hours and prevented him from widening his client base, … Continue reading JP Morgan Europe Ltd v Chweidan: EAT 26 Aug 2010
London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm: HL 25 Jun 2008
Unrelated Detriment was no Discrimination The tenant had left his flat and sublet it so as to allow the landlord authority an apparently unanswerable claim for possession. The authority appealed a finding that they had to take into account the fact that the tenant was disabled and make reasonable adjustments. Held: The authority’s appeal succeeded. … Continue reading London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm: HL 25 Jun 2008
Igen Ltd v Wong: CA 18 Feb 2005
Proving Discrimination – Two Stage Process Each appeal raised procedural issues in discrimination cases, asking where, under the new regulations, the burden of proof had shifted. Held: The new situation required a two stage process before a complaint could be upheld. First the claimant had to establish facts allowing the tribunal to conclude, in the … Continue reading Igen Ltd v Wong: CA 18 Feb 2005
Post Office v Jones: CA 5 Jun 2001
The employee had become diabetic. Upon his coming to require insulin, the employer undertook a new risk assessment, and restricted his duties as a driver. He claimed disability discrimination. At the tribunal, both employer and employee brought medical evidence. Held: The employer’s duties under the Act had to be seen in the context of the … Continue reading Post Office v Jones: CA 5 Jun 2001
Stockton on Tees Borough Council v Aylott: EAT 11 Mar 2009
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS Extension of time: just and equitable2002 Act and pre-action requirements DISABILITY DISCRIMINATIONDisability related discrimination Direct disability discriminationReasonable adjustmentsExclusions/jurisdictionsVICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION: Detriment HARASSMENT: ConductThis case raises issues of legal and practical importance for discrimination cases. It is one of a number of cases in which the Employment Appeal Tribunal is considering whether the judgment … Continue reading Stockton on Tees Borough Council v Aylott: EAT 11 Mar 2009
