CP Regents Park Two Ltd v Ilyas: EAT 16 Jun 2015

EAT Race Discrimination: Direct – Race discrimination – direct (section 13(1) Equality Act 2010)
The Employment Tribunal (‘the ET’) had upheld the Claimant’s claims of direct race discrimination in respect of: (1) the manner of his investigation meeting; and (2) the referral of the Claimant to the disciplinary process.
On the Respondent’s appeal, allowing the appeal in part:
(1) In respect of the manner of the investigation meeting, the ET had not erred in its approach to comparators: the distinctions relied on by the Respondent were not material for the purposes of section 23(1) Equality Act. In any event, the ET had been entitled to have regard to those comparators in constructing the hypothetical comparator. Moreover, the ET had not assumed discrimination from the Respondent’s unreasonable treatment but had considered whether it had an explanation for the unduly aggressive and inappropriate manner of the investigation meeting and concluded it did not. The ET had been entitled to have regard to the questions asked as to the Claimant’s nationality/race as evidencing the reason why the manager had pre-judged the Claimant, which explained the tenor of the investigatory meeting. The conclusions reached were permissible. Appeal dismissed on this point.
(2) When it came to the referral of the Claimant into the disciplinary />br process, however, the position had (on the ET’s findings) changed; any comparison would have to be with another employee who had failed to provide adequate, exculpatory responses to the allegations put to him. The ET’s reasoning did not disclose it had properly considered whether the Claimant had been treated less favourably in these circumstances and that rendered the conclusion unsafe. Appeal allowed on this point.

[2015] UKEAT 0366 – 14 – 1606
Equality Act 2010 13(1)
England and Wales

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549016