Application for leave to appeal against dismissal of complaint of race discrimination and unfair dismissal. Judges: Peter Gibson LJ Citations: [2001] EWCA Civ 446 Links: Bailii Statutes: Race Relations Act 1976 1(1)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment, Discrimination Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.200861
The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for race discrimination, saying that the defendant had failed to comply with its own disciplinary procedures. She had been accused of making inappropriate remarks after 9/11. The EAT had found that the ET had misunderstood the defendant’s procedures. Held: The appeal succeeded. The suspension had proceeded despite awareness … Continue reading H Aziz v Crown Prosecution Service: CA 31 Jul 2006
The employee appealed a finding that the employer had not discriminated against her, saying that the tribunal had refused an adjournment. Held: The refusal or grant of an adjournment was a matter within the discretion of a tribunal in fulfillment of its case management duties. In the absence of exceptional reasons, an appeal court could … Continue reading Harrold v North Bristol NHS Trust: CA 2 Nov 2007
EAT RACE DISCRIMINATION Inferring discrimination Comparison Appeal by the Hospital Trust on grounds that (a) there was a failure to construct a true hypothetical comparator (b) there was a failure to properly consider whether the treatment of the Claimant was on racial grounds under s.1(1)(a) of the Race Relations Act 1976 and (c) there were … Continue reading Central Manchester University Hospitals Nhs Foundation Trust v Browne: EAT 10 Feb 2012
The defendant’s employee disliked his neighbours – the plaintiffs. Whilst working in the sorting office, he wrote racially abusive materials on letters addressed to them. The plaintiffs appealed a finding that the defendant was not liable because the acts were not carried out as part of the employee’s work. Held: The test was whether the … Continue reading Irving and Irving v Post Office: CA 1987
EAT RACE DISCRIMINATION Detriment CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT Wrongful dismissal Appellant wrongly and unreasonably accused by employers of sexual harassment. Employers accept his denial but instruct him not seek to discuss the charges with the alleged victim. Appellant subsequently disobeys that instruction and is summarily dismissed.Tribunal holds:(1) Appellant not entitled to a claim that dismissal was … Continue reading Olasehinde v Panther Securities Plc: EAT 10 Jun 2008
The claimant sought to allege race discrimination and appealed refusal by the respondents to release required documents. She had been turned down for an appointment to the Trident task force, and sought disclosure of the reasons. The respondent said that she had failed in her vetting, and that they were prohibited in law from disclosing … Continue reading Barracks v Coles and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: CA 21 Jul 2006
The appellant challenged dismissal of her claim for indirect racial discrimination based on two grounds. First, that the Tribunal’s decision was perverse; in other words that it was a decision which, on the evidence before it, no reasonable tribunal could have reached. Secondly, that the Tribunal failed to interpret the law relating to indirect discrimination … Continue reading Meikle v Nottingham City Council: EAT 14 Apr 1994
Citations: [1998] EWHC Admin 451 Links: Bailii Statutes: Race Relations Act 1976 1(1) Citing: See Also – Mensah v Royal College of Midwives EAT 17-Dec-1996 . . Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete. Discrimination, Employment Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138572
The Court discussed the nature of ‘a requirement or condition’ for the purposes of the 1976 Act. Held: Dillon LJ said: ‘The case of Perera decided that there can only be a requirement or condition within s.1(1)(b) of the Race Relations Act 1976 if the requirement or condition, or whatever other word may be used … Continue reading Meer v London Borough of Tower Hamlets: CA 26 May 1988
The absence of any other explanation for the unfair dismissal of a black worker, does not of itself and inescapably lead to finding of race bias, or racial discrimination. He had been dismissed following complaints of sexual harassment, later found to be unsupported. The tribunal reasoned that the dismissal was to be presumed to be … Continue reading Strathclyde Regional Council v Zafar; Zafar v Glasgow City Council: HL 16 Oct 1997
amnesty_ahmedEAT2009 EAT RACE DISCRIMINATION – Direct discriminationRACE DISCRIMINATION – Indirect discriminationRACE DISCRIMINATION – Protected by s. 41UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissalClaimant, of (northern) Sudanese ethnic origin, applied for promotion to role of ‘Sudan researcher’ for Amnesty International – Not appointed because Amnesty believed that the appointment of a person of her ethnic origin would compromise … Continue reading Amnesty International v Ahmed: EAT 13 Aug 2009
Bias may not be intentional The applicant claimed that he had been denied appointment to a job with London Regional Transport because he had brought a number of previous race discrimination claims against it or associated companies. An industrial tribunal had upheld his claim of victimisation contrary to section 2(1) of the 1976 Act, finding … Continue reading Swiggs and others v Nagarajan: HL 15 Jul 1999
The claimant had been struck from the register of nurses after convictions arising from failures of his staff at his nursing home with regard to drug management. He had then brought claims of unlawful race discrimination against the health authority and against the respondent. Those claims had been dismissed as frivolous, no valid comparator having … Continue reading Balamoody v United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting: CA 6 Dec 2001
The appellant’s allegations of racial discrimination had been dismissed. He argued that the reasons given were inadequate. Because such claims are often unusually sensitive to the particular facts, it can be more important for the tribunal to deal . .
The complainant, a Cypriot, argued that the respondent college’s practice, determined by government policy, of charging higher fees to ‘overseas’ students than to ‘home’ students indirectly discriminated against him on the ground of his race. ‘Overseas’ students were defined as those who had not been resident in the UK or the EEC for the three … Continue reading Orphanos v Queen Mary College: HL 1985
The appellant’s application for full registration as a qualified medical practitioner had been refused by the GMC after a five-year maximum period of limited registration. His application for full registration in accordance with section 25 of the Medical Act 1983 was refused by the GMC. He then applied to the Review Board for Overseas Qualified … Continue reading Khan v General Medical Council: CA 11 Apr 1994
Miss Singh challenged her school’s policy which operated to prevent her wearing while at school a steel bangle, a Kara. She said this was part of her religion as a Sikh. Held: Earlier comparable applications had been made under human rights law, but this was under the 1976 Act. The evidence established that the Sikh … Continue reading Watkins-Singh, Regina (on the Application of) v The Governing Body of Aberdare Girls’ High School and Another: Admn 29 Jul 2008
An employer’s liability for racial abuse by its employees is wider than its liability under the rules of vicarious liability. The statute created new obligations. Sex and race discrimination legislation seeks to eradicate the ‘very great evil’ of discrimination.Waite LJ said: ‘a statute is to be construed according to its legislative purpose, with due regard … Continue reading Tower Boot Company Limited v Jones: CA 11 Dec 1996
The claimant had been a cook. A poster was put up at work redrawn to show her in a sexually suggestive pose. The court now considered an appeal agreed by consent by the parties. Held: Since the case had been heard, the Court of Appeal in Tower Boot had amended the law, and the appeal … Continue reading AB v CD: EAT 13 Nov 1997
The house considered the burden of proof in cases involving allegations of discrimination. Held: Lord Morison ‘The requirement necessary to establish less favourable treatment which is laid down by section 1(1) of the Act of 1976 is not one of less favourable treatment than that which would have been accorded by a reasonable employer in … Continue reading Glasgow City Council v Zafar: SCS 1997
EAT Practice and Procedure – Application/Claim The Claimant, a doctor, put forward a complaint to the Tribunal that the MDU, his professional body, had been guilty of race discrimination in the manner in which they had provided or failed to provide services to him in connection with disciplinary proceedings against him. The Tribunal rejected his … Continue reading Wagunyanya v Medical Defence Union Services Ltd: EAT 6 Jul 2006
The company appealed against a finding of race discrimination. Held: As a matter of law the concept of vicarious liability provided for in Section 41(1) of the Act, identical to that under Section 32(1) of the Race Relations Act 1976. Citations: [1995] UKEAT 56 – 94 – 2703, [1995] IRLR 529 Links: Bailii Statutes: Race … Continue reading Tower Boot Company Ltd v Jones: EAT 27 Mar 1995
A teacher of Hong Kong national origin was refused qualified teacher status in this country because the Secretary of State had not exercised a power conferred on him by the relevant regulations to treat her Hong Kong qualifications as equivalent to the necessary UK qualifications. The refusal was alleged to constitute indirect racial discrimination. The … Continue reading Hampson v Department of Education and Science: HL 7 Jun 1990
The claimant sought damages for discrimination by the respondent, who replied that as a professional he was not a ‘worker’ within the legislation. Held: The respondents were a society providing advice and representation to its members. It was an organisation of workers. To fall within the ambit of the category of ‘any other organisation’ the … Continue reading Medical Protection Society, Dr Bown, Dr Hickey v Dr Sadek: CA 12 Jul 2004
The Lord Chancellor’s action in appointing to a special adviser’s post someone he already knew and trusted, without first advertising the post openly, was not an act of sex or race discrimination. Had they applied, they would not have been appointed because they were not personally known to the Lord Chancellor. In practice a post … Continue reading Coker and Osamor v The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chancellor’s Department: CA 22 Nov 2001
The employer, a vehicle hire operator, explained to the Claimant employee following her appointment as a receptionist their policy that if she received an enquiry from any coloured or Asians, judging by their voices, she was to tell them that there were no vehicles available. Upset by that policy she promptly resigned, and later claimed … Continue reading Weathersfield Ltd (T/a Van and Truck Rentals) v Sargent: CA 10 Dec 1998
Swedish students on vocational courses in the UK had received loans from their home country, but were denied the grants towards their course fees which were made to English students. They claimed race discrimination. Although the withholding of grants was an indirect discrimination, it fell outside the Act and was not actionable because the acts … Continue reading Nabadda and Others v Westminster City Council; Gomilsek v Haringey London Borough Council: CA 24 Feb 2000
The tribunal considered the method of selection of the pool on a claim for indirect discrimination. In this case the claimant alleged that an age test applied on his application would effectively limit the proportion of coloured who would meet the tests. Held: The Commission’s appeal was allowed in part. The proportion of late immigrants … Continue reading Perera v Civil Service Commission (No 2): EAT 1982
It was not discriminatory of school governors to require a ‘communicant’ headmaster in a Church of England school. Citations: Gazette 21-Apr-1993, Independent 04-Mar-1993 Statutes: Race Relations Act 1976 4(2) 1(1)(b) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment, Education, Discrimination Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.78458
The court considered the nature of evidence which will be available to tribunals considering a race discrimination claim. Held: A complainant must prove his or her case on the balance of probabilities, but it is unusual to find direct evidence of racial discrimination, and a case will usually depend on what inferences can properly be … Continue reading King v Great Britain China Centre: CA 1991
E complained that his exclusion from admission to the school had been racially discriminatory. The school applied an Orthodox Jewish religious test which did not count him as Jewish because of his family history. Held: The school’s appeal failed. English law may be at fault because it made no allowance for any justification of direct … Continue reading E, Regina (on The Application of) v Governing Body of JFS and Another: SC 16 Dec 2009
Allowance of Stigma Damages The employees claimed damages, saying that the way in which their employer had behaved during their employment had led to continuing losses, ‘stigma damages’ after the termination. Held: It is an implied term of any contract of employment that the employer shall not without reasonable and proper cause conduct itself in … Continue reading Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI); Mahmud v Bank of Credit and Commerce International: HL 12 Jun 1997
Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than others, and that it was contrary to the obligations of the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004
The claimant, a male to female transsexual, challenged a decision by the respondent to refuse breast augmentation treatment. The Trust had a policy ‘GRS is a Low Priority treatment due to the limited evidence of clinical effectiveness and is not routinely funded.’ Held: The claim for judicial review failed. There was no general medical concensus … Continue reading AC v Berkshire West Primary Care Trust, Equality and Human Rights Commissions intervening: Admn 25 May 2010
Dyson LJ considered the interaction between race relations law and planning permission in the context of gypsy encampments. He looked at section 71 of the 1976 Act and said: ‘In my judgment, it is important to emphasise that the section 71(1) duty is not a duty to achieve a result, namely to eliminate unlawful racial … Continue reading Baker and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others: CA 28 Feb 2008
The Council applied for the committal of the defendant for an alleged breach of a without notice injunction. Notice of the injunction had been placed at the site, requiring nobody to move caravans onto the land. Held: The application succeeded. Having examined the case law the need for committal was established. The defendant was to … Continue reading Broxbourne Borough Council v Robb and Others: QBD 27 Jun 2011
The applicant had succeeded in an action for race discrimination against the respondents. By the conclusion of those proceedings he was no longer employed, and sought a reference. It was refused. He issued new proceedings asserting that this was an . .
The court was asked as to the duty of local housing authorities towards homeless people who claim to be ‘vulnerable’, and therefore to have ‘a priority need’ for the provision of housing accommodation under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996. Those . .
The claimant said that a scheme drawn by the defendant for compensating British civilians interned by the Japanese during the second world war was indirectly discriminatory on racial grounds by requiring a national origin link with the UK. She had . .
A flat was sold, but before the purchasers registered the transfer, the seller was sequestrated, and his trustee registered his own interest as trustee. The buyer complained that the trustee was unjustly enriched.
Held: The Act defined the . .