The Industrial Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider and rule upon other acts of racial discrimination not included in the complaints in the Originating Application.
Racial discrimination may be established as a matter of direct primary fact. ‘More often racial discrimination will have to be established, if at all, as a matter of inference. It is of the greatest importance that the primary facts from which such inference is drawn are set out with clarity by the Tribunal in its fact-finding role, so that the validity of the inference can be examined. Either the facts justifying such inference exist or they do not, but only the Tribunal can say what those facts are. A mere intuitive hunch, for example, that there has been unlawful discrimination, is insufficient without facts being found to support that conclusion.’ and ‘the complainant is entitled to complain to the Tribunal that a person has committed an unlawful act of discrimination, but it is the act of which complaint is made and no other that the Tribunal must consider and rule upon. If the act of which complaint is made is found not to be proven, it is not for the Tribunal to find another act of racial discrimination of which complaint has not been made to give a remedy in respect of that other act . . If [the Tribunal] finds that the complaint is well founded, the remedies which it can give the complainant under s.56(1) of the 1976 Act are specifically directed to the act to which the complaint relates.’
Balcombe LJ, Peter Gibson LJ, Stuart-Smith LJ
[1993] EWCA Civ 37, [1994] IRLR 124
Bailii
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 . .
Appeal from – Chapman and Another v Simon EAT 13-Jul-1992
. .
Cited by:
Cited – London 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 . .
Cited – Qureshi v Victoria University of Manchester EAT 21-Jun-1996
The Industrial Tribunal only has jurisdiction to consider and rule upon the act or acts of which complaint is made to it. The questions on a complaint of race discrimination are: (a) Did the act complained of actually occur? (b) If the act . .
Cited – The Law Society v Kamlesh Bahl EAT 7-Jul-2003
EAT Sex Discrimination – Direct
The complainant had been suspended from her position as Vice President of the Law Society. The Society and its officers appealed findings of sex and race discrimination . .
Cited – London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham, G Alltimes v L Ezeonyim EAT 7-Jun-2000
EAT The claimant had succeeded in his claim for race discrimination. The employer appealed, saying the tribunal had misunderstood its harassment procedure so as to be wrong in law. The claimant complained of a . .
Cited – Law Society v Bahl CA 30-Jul-2004
The claimant had succeeded before the employment tribunal in her claim of race discrimination by the respondent and senior officers. She now appealed the reversal of that judgment. The claimant asked the tribunal to draw inferences of discrimination . .
Cited – Stockton on Tees Borough Council v Aylott EAT 11-Mar-2009
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS
Extension of time: just and equitable
2002 Act and pre-action requirements
DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
Disability related discrimination
Direct disability . .
Cited – Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold) CA 25-Mar-1999
The applicant had soft tissue injuries around the spine as a consequence of a back injury at work. He was absent from work for a long time as a result of his injuries, and he was eventually dismissed when his medical advisers could provide no clear . .
Cited – Dunelm (Soft Furnishings) Ltd v Baker and Another EAT 30-Oct-2012
EAT Practice and Procedure : Amendment
Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity
In the claim for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal, parties proceeded on common basis that dismissal was on 17 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination, Employment
Leading Case
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.182985