The applicant had been dismissed with another. He claimed race discrimination. The employer appealed, saying that the tribunal’s award had been described in such a way as not to allow them to identify the various elements in the findings.
Held: The Tribunal had failed properly to apply the test. They should, first have identified a protected characteristic, and then identified adverse treatment so as to raise the issue of racial discrimination. Then the reasons for the treatment in question should have been scrutinised, including any reasons put forward in evidence. Finally, it if was found that the reasons were insufficient, there were inferences to be drawn, and evidence sought, with regard to comparators. The decision on unfair dismissal stood, but the finding of race discrimination was remitted to be reheard before a different tribunal.
Judges:
His Honour Judge H Wilson
Links:
Statutes:
Citing:
Appealed to – Lambert v Lowery and Another CA 2-Feb-2001
Renewed application for leave to appeal.
Held: No error of law had been shown. . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Lambert v Lowery and Another CA 2-Feb-2001
Renewed application for leave to appeal.
Held: No error of law had been shown. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79755
