The appellant appealed a finding against her by the ET and EAT on her claim of race discrimination. The tribunal found that the applicant had been treated less favourably, but had been unable to find any evidence that this had its origins in her race. However two paragraphs of the judgment were inconsistent. The judgement had failed to distinguish between adverse treatment generally, and adverse treatment which would not have affected others. The tribunal had a duty to make findings on the facts presented before it, and was therefore defective. Tribunals should recognise that there are two issues, the treatment issue, and the causation issue, and it is safer where there are a number of complaints, to deal with the two issues only by reference to the individual complaints. Nevertheless, any fault would in the judgement would have worked in her favour, and the decision was not set aside.
courtcommentary.com In considering the issues of treatment and causation in a claim of racial discrimination it is safer for the Tribunal to deal with the two issues only by reference to the individual complaints and not globally
Judges:
The President, Lord Justice Waller And Lady Justice Hale
Citations:
[2001] EWCA Civ 806
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – King v Great Britain China Centre CA 1991
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 . .
Cited – Strathclyde Regional Council v Zafar; Zafar v Glasgow City Council HL 16-Oct-1997
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination, Employment
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147564
