SEX DISCRIMINATION – Direct
SEX DISCRIMINATION – Indirect
RELIGION OR BELIEF DISCRIMINATION
HARASSMENT
The Appeal Tribunal dismissed appeals against findings that the Respondent had been subjected to direct sex discrimination and harassment. The Tribunal’s findings of fact were a sufficient basis for its conclusions on each of these claims.
The Appeal Tribunal allowed the Appellant’s appeal against the Tribunal’s decision that there had been direct discrimination against the Respondent on grounds of religion or belief. The Employment Tribunal had incorrectly concluded that an employer acting because of its own religion or belief discriminated against its employees – Lee v Ashers Baking Co Limited [2018] 3 WLR 1294 applied. There was no sufficient evidential basis for any conclusion that the Appellant discriminated against the Respondent because of her religion or belief.
The Appeal Tribunal allowed an appeal against the Employment Tribunal’s conclusion that there had been indirect discrimination on grounds of religion or belief. There was no sufficient evidence to support the Tribunal’s conclusion that the Appellant had applied any provision criterion or practice to the Respondent – Nottingham City Transport Limited v Harvey (UKEAT/032/12, [2012] UKEAT 0032 – 12 – 0510) applied. Further, if the provision criterion or practice identified by the Employment Tribunal were applied, there was no comparative disadvantage – see section 19(2)(b), Equality Act 2010.
Citations:
[2019] UKEAT 0059 – 18 – 1202
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.633781
