EAT Alleged failure by the ET to make appropriate findings of fact, to deal properly with issue of comparators, and to follow the process indicated in the Barton case in respect of the transfer of the burden of proof (section 63A Sex Discrimination Act 1975) – all dismissed – no order for costs.- leave to … Continue reading Hillman v BBC Resources Ltd: EAT 30 Mar 2004
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION SEX DISCRIMINATION – Burden of Proof Ex-employee given unfavourable reference – Claim that terms of reference were partly on account of her having previously brought sex discrimination proceedings against employers – Claim decided by the Tribunal on basis of the ‘reverse burden of proof’ provisions of s. 63A of Sex Discrimination Act … Continue reading Pothecary Witham Weld (A Firm) and Another v Bullimore and Another: EAT 29 Mar 2010
The claimant appealed against adverse findings on her claims of sex discrimination. The court considered questions arising from the provisions relating to the transfer of the burden of proof in a discrimination case. Held: Questions of the burden of proof are very common in discrimination cases: ‘The factual content of the cases does not simply … Continue reading Madarassy v Nomura International Plc: CA 26 Jan 2007
EAT Sex Discrimination : Direct – The Claimant and a male comparator were permitted to work from home on certain days each week to facilitate child care arrangements. The Claimant’s right to do so was revoked, although she was offered the facility of more flexible working hours. The explanation for the Claimant’s apparently less favourable … Continue reading The Solicitors Regulation Authority v Mitchell: EAT 17 Feb 2014
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
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