EAT Race Discrimination : Indirect – In a test case, it was assumed that BME candidates disproportionately failed the CSA test, passing which was necessary to progress to higher grades in the Civil Service. The Respondent argued successfully that claims of indirect discrimination could not succeed unless the individual Claimants could prove the reason they failed the test. Unless they could do so they could not show that they were at ‘that disadvantage’ as required by statute: showing that the group of them who were BME were disadvantaged was not enough.
Held There was no evidence to suggest the individual Claimants were not at ‘that disadvantage’ in a situation in which it was known that the group of which they were part suffered it, where the precise reason why an apparently neutral criterion had that effect was unknown.
Judges:
Langstaff J
Citations:
[2014] UKEAT 0480 – 13 – 1605
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Home Office (UK Border Agency) v Essop and Others CA 22-Jun-2015
The appellant challenged a finding that it was guilty of indirect race discrimination. A statistical study showed that BME candidates did rather less well on a standard assessment test, but while the correlation was clear, the manner of . .
At EAT – Essop and Others v Home Office (UK Border Agency) SC 5-Apr-2017
The appellants alleged indirect race and belief discrimination in the conditions of their employment by the respondent. Essop came as lead claimant challenging the tests used for promotion. Statistics showed lower pass rates for BME candidates, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.526088