Anyanwu and Another v South Bank Student Union and Another: HL 24 May 2001

The university had imposed a new constitution on its students union, which resulted in the dismissal of the claimant. He sought to assert racial discrimination.
Held: The concept of ‘aiding’ somebody in committing discriminatory behaviour under the section, connoted assistance beyond the negligible, but did not need to be substantial or productive. The word should be used in its ordinary and natural sense. The more recent Act created a different definition, and that was to be reflected in the interpretation. The case was to be remitted to the employment trubunal for a rehearing. There is a particularly strong reluctance to strike out discrimination claims where the issue to be decided will almost inevitably depend upon disputed evidence.

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Millett
Times 27-Mar-2001, Gazette 24-May-2001, [2001] ELR 511, [2001] UKHL 14, [2001] 2 All ER 353, [2001] 1 WLR 638, [2001] ICR 391, [2001] IRLR 305, [2001] Emp LR 420
House of Lords, Bailii
Race Relations Act 1976 33 (1)
England and Wales
CitedHenderson v Henderson 20-Jul-1843
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation
The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings.
Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule . .
CitedHenderson v Hunting Contract Services EAT 1-Jul-1998
. .
CitedTower Boot Company Limited v Jones CA 11-Dec-1996
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 . .
Appeal fromAnyanwu and Another v South Bank Students’ Union and Another CA 4-Nov-1999
A university was not acting in a racially discriminatory manner because of the acts of its student union in dismissing two workers after the university had itself expelled them as students. The term ‘knowingly aided’ in the Act was not to be read so . .
At first instanceRegina v South Bank University ex parte Anyanwu Admn 27-Jun-1996
The university was concerned at the way it saw the students’ union being run, and imposed a constitution which resulted in the claimants being dismissed. The claimants sought judicial review of the imposition of the new constitution, but that was . .
CitedHallam and Another v Avery and Another CA 7-Jan-2000
A Romany family booked a council hall for a wedding. Police later approached the council and made misleading assertions about the character of the family resulting in the imposition of additional conditions on the contract. There was however no . .
See AlsoAnywanwu and Another v South Bank Students Union and others EAT 12-Sep-1997
. .
LeaveAnyanwu and Another v South Bank Students’ Union South Bank University CA 19-Mar-1999
The applicants sought an extension of time to apply to set aside leave to appeal given to their opponents.
Held: The cause of the respondent seemed weak, but raised a point of law which needed determination and the appeal should be allowed to . .

Cited by:
CitedLondon Borough of Greenwich Simon Trotter v Jacinth Browne EAT 24-Apr-2002
EAT Race Discrimination – Victimisation
The defendants appealed a finding of direct race discrimination and victimisation. She had previously succeeded in a discrimination claim. Subsequently, disciplinary . .
CitedMiles v Gilbank CA 11-May-2006
The employee claimed she had been bullied by her manager after she became pregnant. She sought damages both from the employer and from the manager personally.
Held: The manageress was personally liable. The scheme for sex based discrimination . .
CitedBNP Paribas v A Mezzotero EAT 30-Mar-2004
EAT Appeal from ET’s decision, at directions hearing, permitting evidence to be adduced, at the forthcoming hearing of a direct sex discrimination and victimisation complaint, of the Applicant’s allegation that, . .
CitedOyarce v Cheshire County Council CA 2-May-2008
The court was asked as to whether the provisions for the reversal of the burden of proof in discrimination cases was limited to findings of discrimination or extended also to issues of victimisation, and as to whether section 5A had properly . .
CitedTimbo v Greenwich Council for Racial Equality EAT 2-Oct-2012
On the third day of the hearing, at the close of the Claimant’s case, the Respondent applied to strike out the claim. The Tribunal reserved judgment and acceded to the application, . .
CitedDeer v University of Oxford CA 6-Feb-2015
The claimant had previously succeeded in a claim of sex discrimination against the University, her former employer. She now appealed against rejection of her claims alleging later victimisation.
Held: Two appeals succeed, and those matters . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.77828