Click the case name for better results:

Meikle v Nottingham City Council: EAT 14 Apr 1994

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

Medical Protection Society, Dr Bown, Dr Hickey v Dr Sadek: CA 12 Jul 2004

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

Olasehinde v Panther Securities Plc: EAT 10 Jun 2008

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

Barracks v Coles and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: CA 21 Jul 2006

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

Harrold v North Bristol NHS Trust: CA 2 Nov 2007

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

Central Manchester University Hospitals Nhs Foundation Trust v Browne: EAT 10 Feb 2012

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

Irving and Irving v Post Office: CA 1987

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

Weathersfield Ltd (T/a Van and Truck Rentals) v Sargent: CA 10 Dec 1998

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

Amnesty International v Ahmed: EAT 13 Aug 2009

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

E, Regina (on The Application of) v Governing Body of JFS and Another: SC 16 Dec 2009

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

Swiggs and others v Nagarajan: HL 15 Jul 1999

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