Bakkali v Greater Manchester Buses (South) Ltd (T/A Stage Coach Manchester): EAT 10 May 2018

Harassment – Purpose – Religion or Belief Discrimination – Where the same facts are relied upon for a claim of direct discrimination on grounds of religious belief or race and a claim of harassment for conduct related to those protected characteristics, an Employment Tribunal does not err in determining the harassment claim if they rely on their findings of fact on the direct discrimination claim provided they apply the correct ‘related to’ test required by Equality Act 2010 section 26. No evidence from the alleged perpetrator as to why he uttered offending words is required although an adverse inference may be drawn from his not giving evidence. Findings of fact on the context in which the words were spoken is relevant. Richmond Pharmacology v Dhaliwal [2009] ICR 724 considered. The Employment Tribunal did not err in the test for harassment which they applied. Although a different Employment Tribunal may have come to a different conclusion, they did not err in law. Appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2018] UKEAT 0176 – 17 – 1005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616890