

Links: Home \| swarblaw - law discussions		swarb.co.uk - law index These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases. Â
		Discrimination - From: 2002 To: 2002 This page lists 342 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018. Â Â Frette v France; ECHR 2002 - (2003) 2 FLR 9; (2002) 38 EHRR 438 Â W Crichlow Glasgow E Rowland v Community Housing Association Ltd EAT/1056/00 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D M Levy QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation Â O Okponobi v Holland and Barrett Retail, M Mayes, D Smith, M Moran EAT/1269/00 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation Â Commissioner of Metropolitan Police, Ms M C Snaith v Ms M C Mcginley EAT/574/00 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid Qc Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Others [ EATn ] Â Commissioner of Metropolitan Police M C Snaith v M C Mcginley EAT/574/00 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid QC Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Others Â Jones, Kirker, Angel and Bond v 3M Healthcare Ltd, Ambitions Personnel (Nottinghamshire) Ltd, British Sugar Plc, New Possibilities NHS Trust and Hackney [2002] EWCA Civ 304; [2002] ICR 1124 2002 CA Pill, Mummery and Latham LJJ Discrimination In each case the claimants had pursued claims for disability discrimination, and then had been given inadequate references after dismissal. They appealed dismissal of their claim for compensation for victimisation. Held: Applying Adekeye, the claims failed. The words of the statute were clear. Â Galloway v Birmingham City Council, Eastman, Haynes EAT/503/01 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EAT ] Â O Okponobi v 10 Holland and Barrett Retail 2 M Mayes, D Smith, M Moran EAT/1269/00 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation. [ EATn ] Â W Crichlow, Ms Glasgow, E Rowland v Community Housing Association Ltd EAT/1056/00 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D M Levy Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation. [ EATn ] Â Gill v Withington and Another (Racial, Religious Political Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 544_00 4 Jan 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Gill v Withington and Another (Racial, Religious Political Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 1 4 Jan 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â McGinley v Ramesh Rana Andras House Ltd (Sex Discrimination/Jurisdiction) [2002] NIIT 4 10 Jan 2002 NIIT Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Irwin v Armagh and Dungannon Health and Social Services Trust [2002] NIFET 180_00 11 Jan 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination (Religious/Sex Discrimination/Jurisdiction) [ Bailii ] Â Ms S Croft v Consignia Plc EAT/1160/00 11 Jan 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P) Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Irwin v Armagh and Dungannon Health and Social Services Trust [2002] NIFET 2 11 Jan 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination FENI Religious/Sex Discrimination/Jurisdiction [ Bailii ] Â Afolayan v Star Texaco Limited, Kelly, Thirukkumar, Doukanaris EAT/1088/00 14 Jan 2002 EAT His Honour Judge Peter Clark Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EAT ] Â D Singh v Focus Housing Group, R Clarke EAT/1175/00 14 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Langstaff Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â K Ratcliffe v J Hussaney, Chester City Football (In Administration) EAT/1411/01 14 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feelings. [ EATn ] Â K Ratcliffe v J Hussaney Chester City Football (In Administration) EAT/1411/01 14 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to Feelings Â D Singh v Focus Housing Group R Clarke EAT/1175/00 14 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Langstaff QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd [2002] IRLR 228; Times, 29 January 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 17 15 Jan 2002 CA Keene LJ Discrimination Application for leave to appeal 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Brannigan v Belfast City Council [2002] NIFET 040_98 16 Jan 2002 FENI Discrimination Religious Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Brannigan v Belfast City Council [2002] NIFET 3 16 Jan 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination Religious Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Ms N Hussain v Midland Cosmetic Sales Plc and others EAT/915/00 17 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Burke Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â N Hussain v Midland Cosmetic Sales Plc and others EAT/915/00 17 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Burke QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â Gbokoyi v Bennett's Eco-Inverter (Environmental Services) Ltd [2002] UKEAT 1282_00_1801; EAT/1282/00 18 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Burke QC Employment, Discrimination The claimant appealed against dismissal of her unfair dismissal and of her maternity related discrimination claim. Held: The appeal succeeded: "it does not appear that the tribunal gave any separate consideration to whether the pregnancy was an effective cause of the adverse treatment of Mrs Gbokoyi and, insofar as it relied on the reasons which it had set out for rejecting the unfair dismissal claim, those reasons were flawed." 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Javed Dar v Sema Group UK Ltd, Shaun Plant EAT/846/01 21 Jan 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Sommerville-Cotton v Barclays Capital Services Ltd EAT/372/00; [2002] UKEAT 372_00_2501 25 Jan 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Wall Discrimination, Employment EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â S Kuttappan v London Borough of Croydon and others EAT/0039/00 25 Jan 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Bell Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â S Kuttappan v London Borough of Croydon and others EAT/0039/00 25 Jan 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Bell Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Sivanandan v Hackney Action for Racial Equality Executive Committee [2002] EWCA Civ 111 25 Jan 2002 CA Discrimination 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Fielding v The United Kingdom 36940/97; Times, 25 February 2002; [2002] ECHR 10 29 Jan 2002 ECHR Human Rights, Discrimination, Benefits, Income Tax Hudoc Judgment (Struck out of the list) Struck out of the list (friendly settlement) The claimant's wife had died. He sought the benefits, including tax allowances, which would have been paid to him had he been a woman. Before the hearing, a friendly settlement was reached under which the UK government agreed to pay the claim. The 1999 Act already made bereavement benefits available to both men and women. Social Security and Benefits Act 1992 - Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â A Ahuja v Inghams (Accountants) EAT/1271/00 30 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â The Premium Cream Co Ltd v K Parsons EAT/1355/99; EAT/225/99 30 Jan 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Charles Employment, Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination The employer appealed a finding of sex discrimination. The court criticised severely the way that the two firms of solicitors had failed to work together to put the real issues before the court. It was wrong for a party to seek to withhold documents which were relevant to the issues before the court. The behaviour of the parties had led to comments from the tribunal which in turn led to allegations of bias. Held: The allegation of bias was not well founded and failed. Tribunals must be careful about settlement discussions held in private. Sex Discrimination Act 1975 1(1)(a) 6(2)(b) - Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 Sch 1 Â A Ahuja v Inghams (Accountants) EAT/1271/00 30 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Elizabeth Marshall v Law Centres Federation 30 Jan 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay Employment, Discrimination The appellant solicitor had been employed by the respondent. They wrote to dismiss her, after failing to obtain funding. She issued proceedings on the basis that she had been victimised after giving evidence for a co-worker in other proceedings against the Federation. The tribunal, having found the lack of funding proved, considered that to be the reason for the dismissal, and found against her. The Tribunal asserted it had used its case management powers. Held: The tribunal had erred in splitting the issues, and effectively failing to consider the applicant's case. Case remitted for re-hearing. Race Relations Act 1976 - Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Â S Yacoubi (Now S Lyons) v Tesco Ltd EAT/1454/00 31 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell Qc Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EATn ] Â S Yacoubi (Now S Lyons) v Tesco Ltd EAT/1454/00; [2002] UKEAT 1454_00_3101 31 Jan 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell QC Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Woodrup v London Borough of Southwark EAT/0702/00; [2002] UKEAT 702_00_0402 4 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Burton Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability Disability Discrimination Act 1995 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Harper v Civilian Personnel B Department, Royal Ulster Constabulary and Another (Jurisdiction) [2002] NIFET 4 4 Feb 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Harper v Civilian Personnel B Department, Royal Ulster Constabulary and Another (Jurisdiction) [2002] NIFET 37_01 4 Feb 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Fitzpatrick v Customs and Excise (Religious Political Discrimination/Unfair Dismissal) [2002] NIFET 5 5 Feb 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Wilson v Police Authority for Ni and others (Jurisdiction) [2002] NIFET 6 5 Feb 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Fitzpatrick v Customs and Excise (Religious Political Discrimination/Unfair Dismissal) [2002] NIFET 170_99 5 Feb 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Wilson v Police Authority for Ni and others (Jurisdiction) [2002] NIFET 350_98 5 Feb 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Deman v Association of University Teachers and others EAT/746/99 5 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P) Discrimination, Employment EAT Race Discrimination - Inferring Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Inferring discrimination. 1 Cites 1 Citers [ EAT ] Â Commissioners of Inland Revenue and Cleave CB v Morgan EAT/851/99; [2002] UKEAT 851_99_0602; [2002] IRLR 776 6 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President) Discrimination, Employment EAT Race Discrimination - Direct 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â S O Williams v HM Prison Service EAT/1236/00 7 Feb 2002 EAT His Honour Judge Wilkie QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation Â G E Whittaker v P and D Watson T/A P and M Watson Haulage Thedepartment of Education and Employment Times, 26 March 2002; EAT/157/01 7 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President) Discrimination, Human Rights, Employment A party sought from the EAT a declaration as to incompatibility of the exemption of small firms from the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act. The industrial tribunal had said it was not a court entitling it to consider such an application. He appealed. Held: Neither the ET nor EAT were courts within the section, and the case must go on to the High Court before the point could be considered. Though this might be puzzling, it remained clear. In future such cases might be dealt with in a way which would expedite the process. EAT Jurisdiction Human Rights Act 1998 4(5) Â P S Andrews v Metal Castings Limited EAT/1336/00 7 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Burton Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability Â Ali and Another v Triesman (McDonagh) Times, 11 March 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 93; [2002] ICR 1026 7 Feb 2002 CA Lord Justice Peter Gibson, Lord Justice Mantell and Lady Justice Arden Discrimination, Employment The applicants sought selection as candidates for the Labour Party. The respondent asserted that such issues were not ones of employment, and therefore not covered by the Act, and appealed a finding of the EAT against them. Held: Sawyer was wrongly decided. The party, when selecting candidates for local elections or allowing nomination to the pool from which candidates were to be selected, was not a body conferring an authorisation or qualification needed for or facilitating engagement in a profession. For section 20(1), the question was whether members of the party were a section of the public. They were not. Section 25 applied to the party. Race Relations Act 1976 12(1)(c) 20(1) 25 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Â Williams v HM Prison Service; EAT 7-Feb-2002 - EAT/1236/00 Â P S Andrews v Metal Castings Limited EAT/1336/00 7 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Burton Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EATn ] Â A v B [2002] NIIT 12 8 Feb 2002 NIIT Discrimination, Employment Sex Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Ireland v Ministry of Defence (Victimisation) [2002] NIFET 5_99 11 Feb 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Ireland v Ministry of Defence (Victimisation) [2002] NIFET 7 11 Feb 2002 FENI Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â DSG Retail Ltd v Manmoham Bawa EAT/1485/99; [2002] UKEAT 1485_99_1202 12 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Charles Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation [ Bailii ] Â Ministry of Defence v E Moitra EAT/1512/00 12 Feb 2002 EAT His Honour Judge Wilkie Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â William James Quirk v Burton Hospital NHS Trust the National Health Service Pensions Agency Times, 19 February 2002; Gazette, 21 March 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 149 12 Feb 2002 CA Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Mummery and Lord Justice Buxton Discrimination The applicant appealed a refusal to rule that the system of allowing females better retirement options than would be granted to him as a Health Service employee were sexually discriminatory. The difference arose because of differentials applied before the directive came into effect, by the 1980 regulations. The case fell within the rule in Barber, and therefore the Equal Treatment Directive did not apply. The 1995 Regulations had removed the difference, but was not retrospective. National Health Service Pension Scheme Regulations 1995 (1995 No 300) - National Health Service (Superannuation) Regulations 1980 (1980 No 362) - ECTreaty Art 141 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Dsg Retail Ltd v Manmoham Bawa EAT/1485/99 12 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Charles Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Ministry of Defence v E Moitra EAT/1512/00 12 Feb 2002 EAT His Honour Judge Wilkie QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â Wilkinson v Commissioners of Inland Revenue [2002] EWHC 182 (Admin); [2002] STC 347 14 Feb 2002 Admn Moses J Taxes Management, Discrimination, Human Rights The case concerned the differential tax treatment between men and women, which granted to widows a tax allowance that was not granted to widowers. Held: The court made a ‘declaration of incompatibility’ pursuant to section 4. 1(1) of the TMA gives to the Commissioners a wide statutory power to grant concessions to taxpayers which derogate from their obligations to pay tax in accordance with the letter of the applicable tax legislation Human Rights Act 1998 4 - Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 262 - Taxes Management Act 1970 1(1) 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Hooper and others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2002] EWHC 191 (Admin) 14 Feb 2002 Admn Moses J Discrimination, Benefits, Human Rights The claimants alleged that the way they were treated as widowers under the benefits subjected them to discrimination. Held: The continued payment of widow's pension was objectively justified. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Morton v South Ayrshire Council Times, 01 March 2002 14 Feb 2002 IHCS Lord Justice-Clerk (Lord Gill), Lord MacLean and Lord Caplan Scotland, Employment, Discrimination, European The applicants were head teachers employed in junior schools. They alleged sex discrimination, and sought to use as comparators head teachers from different local authorities. The comparators had been put forward on the basis that the teacher in question was male and was being paid at a higher rate for work that was like work or work of equal value. Held: Teachers were paid under a system of nationally settled wages. That system was recognised by statute. Accordingly it was appropriate to allow applicants to take as comparators other workers who were not employed by the same employer. The case did not need to be referred to the European Court of Justice, but was instead remitted to the tribunal. Equal Pay Act 1970 1 - Education (Scotland) Act 1980 - EU Treaty Art 141 1 Cites Â J S Monaghan v Close Thornton Solicitors EAT/0003/01 20 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President) Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EATn ] Â J S Monaghan v Close Thornton Solicitors EAT/0003/01 20 Feb 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President) Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability Â Carla Bennett v London Borough of Southwark Times, 28 February 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 223 21 Feb 2002 CA Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Sedley, And, Lord Justice Longmore Discrimination, Employment Mrs Bennet was employed by the respondent. She had made complaints of race and sex discrimination. She was then dismissed, and claimed this was victimisation. Part way through the hearing, her representative failed in an application for an adjournment, and said that if he had been white, his application would have been granted. The tribunal refused to continue because of the allegation of discrimination made against itself. The case was to be relisted, but the respondent to make any application strike out the claim to the new tribunal. The claim was later struck out for the 'scandalous' behaviour of the advocate. The EAT eventually decided that it was wrong for the tribunal to have recused itself. Held: The tribunal ought to have given the advocate an opportunity to withdraw his remark. His behaviour fell short of being scandalous, and the striking out was not proportionate. However it was not open to the EAT to have substituted its own decision, and the case must be reheard. Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 1993 13(2)(e) - Employment Tribunals (Constitution etc.) Regulations 1993 - Employment Tribunals Act 1996 35(1) [ Bailii ] Â Frette v France 36515/97; [2002] ECHR 156; (2002) 38 EHRR 438; [2003] 2 FLR 9; [2002] ECHR 156 26 Feb 2002 ECHR Human Rights, Adoption, Discrimination A single homosexual man complained that the respondent state had made it impossible for him to adopt a child. Held: The claim was within the ambit of article 8 as regards respect for family life, but the court dismissed the claim under article 14 in conjunction with article 8, on margin of appreciation grounds. The claimant succeeded on a separate complaint of a breach of article 6. There was the legitimate aim of protecting the interests of children at a time when child psychiatrists and psychologists were divided in their opinions of the effects of being adopted by homosexual parents. Article 14 " . . complements the other substantive provisions of the Convention and its Protocols. It has no independent existence since it has effect solely in relation to 'the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms' safeguarded by those provisions." European Convention on Human Rights 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Michelle Alabaster v Woolwich Plc, Secretary of State for Social Security [2002] EWCA Civ 21 26 Feb 2002 CA Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Mummery, And, Lord Justice Kay Employment, Benefits, Discrimination, European The applicant had left on maternity leave. Before leaving, her salary had been increased, but the increase was not back-dated to any part of the period over which the regulations required her average earnings to be calculated for statutory maternity pay. She asserted discrimination, and unlawful deductions from her wages. Should her case be referred to the European Court? The regulations had sought to incorporate the effect of the Gillespie case into UK law. Held: The effect of the regulations was unclear, and the question was to be referred to the European Court. Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 - Statutory Maternity Pay (General) Regulations 1986 (SI No. 1960) - Equal Pay Act 1970 - Employment Rights Act 1996 13 - EU Treaty Art 141 - Equal Treatment Directive 75/117/EEC 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Wright v The Governors of Bilton High School, Warwickshire County Council EAT/113/01 28 Feb 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â Rothschild Asset Management Limited v Ako Times, 02 April 2002; Gazette, 25 April 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 236; [2002] 2 All ER 693; [2002] ICR 899; [2002] IRLR 348 1 Mar 2002 CA Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Jonathan Parker, And, Lord Justice Dyson Discrimination, Estoppel The applicant had, in earlier proceedings before the Employment Tribunal, withdrawn issues she had raised. She now sought to pursue them, and the respondent asserted that she was estopped from doing so, and that the matter was res judicata. The chairman, having received a letter withdrawing the case, had entered the decision without hearing from either party, or investigating any evidence. The applicant had relied upon an out of date text book, understanding that she would be able to re-apply. Held: Cause of action estoppel applied where the list of issues in the two actions were identical. Despite the Lennon case, the court could look behind a decision to examine the circumstances in which it had been made. Employment Tribunals differed on this issue from other courts, in not making a distinction between orders dismissing case, and discontinuances. Discontinuance does not release or discharge the cause of action, and in employment tribunal cases the court could look behind the order to see if that was the case. Employment Tribunals (Constitution etc) Regulations 1993 13(2)(a) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â S S Hussain v Hm Prison Service EAT/1250/00 1 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P) Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Deman v Association of University Teachers [2002] EWCA Civ 426 1 Mar 2002 CA Discrimination Application for permission to appeal against a decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â S S Hussain v HM Prison Service EAT/1250/00 1 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P) Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Rice v N and C Kane 9T/A Kane Engineering) (Religious/Political Opinion Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 230_99 5 Mar 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Donnelly v Department of Finance and Personnel (Recruitment Service) Department of Health and Social Services (Religious/Political Opinion Discrimination/Victimisation) [2002] NIFET 8 5 Mar 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Rice v N and C Kane 9T/A Kane Engineering) (Religious/Political Opinion Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 9 5 Mar 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â S Farley v the Prison Service EAT/0359/01 6 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Holland Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EATn ] Â S Farley v The Prison Service EAT/0359/01 6 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Holland Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability Â O Okponobi v Holland and Barrett Retail Ltd, M Mayes, D Smith, M Moran EAT/1269/00 7 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen Qc Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Indirect. [ EATn ] Â J Coxon (Now Asselman) v Rank Xerox UK Ltd EAT/1116/99 7 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Indirect 1 Citers Â O Okponobi v Holland and Barrett Retail Ltd, M Mayes, D Smith, M Moran EAT/1269/00 7 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen QC Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Indirect Â Ms J Coxon (Now Asselman) v Rank Xerox UK Ltd EAT/1116/99 7 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Indirect. [ EATn ] Â Reynolds, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2002] EWHC 426 (Admin) 7 Mar 2002 Admn Discrimination 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â T O Afolabi v London Borough of Southwark EAT/292/01; EAT/1024/00 8 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge McMullen QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct 1 Cites 1 Citers Â T O Afolabi v London Borough of Southwark EAT/1024/00 & EAT/292/01 8 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â London Underground Ltd v D E Harris EAT/0752/00 11 Mar 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feelings. [ EATn ] Â Morton v Northern Ireland Housing Executive (Religious/Political Opinion Discrimination/Gender/Trade Union Activities) [2002] NIFET 454_98 11 Mar 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Morton v Northern Ireland Housing Executive (Religious/Political Opinion Discrimination/Gender/Trade Union Activities) [2002] NIFET 10 11 Mar 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â A Ahuja v Inghams (Accountants) EAT/1271/00 11 Mar 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to Feelings Â London Underground Ltd v D E Harris EAT/0752/00 11 Mar 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to Feelings Â A Ahuja v Inghams (Accountants) EAT/1271/00 11 Mar 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feelings. [ EATn ] Â H M Prison Service v J A Beart EAT/650/01; [2002] UKEAT 650_01_2105 13 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P) Discrimination, Employment EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â London Borough of Croydon v Kuttapan EAT/24/01; EAT/1103/00; [2002] UKEAT 1103_00_1406 18 Mar 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell QC Discrimination, Employment EAT Race Discrimination - Direct 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â Wilding v British Telecommunications Plc [2002] EWCA Civ 349 19 Mar 2002 CA Lord Justice Brooke, Potter LJ Employment, Discrimination, Damages The employee challenged the Employment Tribunal’s finding, upheld by the EAT, that he had not acted reasonably in refusing an offer of re-employment made by his employer. Held: The appeal failed. Potter LJ said: "As was made clear in the Judgment of the EAT, (at paragraph 64) the various authorities referred to by the Tribunal (see paragraph 22 and 23 above) and Payzu –v- Saunders are apt to establish the following principles which (in a form which I have somewhat recast) were accepted as common ground between the parties. (i) It was the duty of Mr Wilding to act in mitigation of his loss as a reasonable man unaffected by the hope of compensation from BT as his former employer; (ii) the onus was on BT as the wrongdoer to show that Mr Wilding had failed in his duty to mitigate his loss by unreasonably refusing the offer of re-employment; (iii) the test of unreasonableness is an objective one based on the totality of the evidence; (iv) in applying that test, the circumstances in which the offer was made and refused, the attitude of BT, the way in which Mr Wilding had been treated and all the surrounding circumstances should be taken into account; and (v) the court or tribunal deciding the issue must not be too stringent in its expectations of the injured party. I would add under (iv) that the circumstances to be taken into account included the state of mind of Mr Wilding." 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Lommers v Minister van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij C-476/99; [2002] EUECJ C-476/99 19 Mar 2002 ECJ European, Discrimination Europa Social policy - Equal treatment of men and women - Derogations - Measures to promote equality of opportunity between men and women - Subsidised nursery places made available by a Ministry to its staff - Places reserved only for children of female officials, save in cases of emergency, to be determined by the employer. "according to settled case law in determining the scope of any derogation from an individual right such as the equal treatment of men and women laid down by the directive, due regard must be had to the principle of proportionality which required that derogations must remain within the limits of what is appropriate and necessary in order to achieve the aim in view and that the principle of equal treatment be reconciled as far as possible with the requirements of the aim thus pursued." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Devenney v The United Kingdom Times, 11 April 2002; 24265/94; [2002] ECHR 310 19 Mar 2002 ECHR Human Rights, Employment, Discrimination, Northern Ireland Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 14 or Art. 13; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings The applicant had wanted to complain of discrimination on religious grounds under the Act to an Fair Employment Tribunal. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland issued a certificate under the section that he had been dismissed to protect public safety and public order, and that his claim was not to be entertained. He applied to the ECHR complaining that the Act denied him the right to a fair hearing. Held: The interference with his Article 6 rights was disproportionate and unlawful. Though states had a margin of appreciation, with interference with an individual's rights, limitations must not restrict or reduce the access left to the individual so that the very essence of the right was impaired. No explanation for the certificate had been or was to be given. Fair Employment (Northern Ireland) Act 1976 42 - European Convention on Human Rights 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Â London Fire and Civil Defence Authority v Maxwell Fasipe; EAT 20-Mar-2002 - EAT/0573/01; EAT/0042/00; [2002] UKEAT 0042_00_2003 Â Â London Fire and Civil Defence Authority v Maxwell Fasipe; EAT 20-Mar-2002 - EAT/0042/00 & EAT/0573/01 Â Pryce v Blair Travel and Leisure Limited EAT/443/01 20 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Holland Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Ms Wangui Wa Goro v London Brough of Hackney, Ms Dobson EAT/191/01 & EAT/197/01 & EAT/ 21 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P) Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â Bayliss v London Borough of Hounslow [2002] EWCA Civ 354 21 Mar 2002 CA Lord Justice Mummery Discrimination 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â General Medical Council v H Cox Times, 16 April 2002; EAT/0076/01 22 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Holland Employment, Discrimination Miss Cox claimed that the Council had not made a proper adjustment so as to allow her to work for them despite her disability. The Council asserted as a preliminary point that they were not a trade organisation within the sections, and so were not caught by the provisions. They appealed a finding against them. Held: The Council was established under the Medical Acts as a regulatory body, setting professional standards so as to protect the public. The involvement in its procedures of the Privy Council confirmed that it operated as a public body, and not a trade organisation. The court should look to the predominant purpose of the organisation. “Is the GMC a trade organisation within the meaning of Section 13? In our judgment it is beyond argument that that at its inception the purpose for which this organisation existed was the protection of the public, and particularly those members of such that had to consult a medical practitioner. The preamble to the 1858 Act said as much and it would be surprising if Parliament of its own volition made an enactment for the purposes of the medical profession. Has the position since changed? We think not. The functions of the GMC are to be those assigned by the Medical Act 1983 (see Section 1(1)), which functions, as emerging from the ensuing sections, are in great substance directly or indirectly concerned with setting and attaining the professional standards that serve to protect the public. We readily accept Mr. Henshaw’s submission that the activities of the GMC serve to maintain the status and reputation of the medical profession and are thus of a benefit to it but that consideration cannot serve to displace the predominant purpose of public protection. Indeed if the medical profession, as such, does benefit from the GMC and its functioning it is arguably because this organisation does not exist for its ‘purpose’ but for the ‘purpose’ of the public, setting standards that are not compromised by self-interest.” Disability Discrimination Act 1995 13 68 - Medical Act 1858 - Medical Act 1983 1 Citers [ EAT ] Â J B Hardman v M Mallon T/A Orchard Lodge Nursing Home EAT/360/01 25 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen Qc Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Injury to feelings. [ EAT ] Â P A Drury v Bedford Hospital NHS Trust EAT/1402/00 25 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Holland Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability Â Drury v Bedford Hospital NHS Trust [2002] UKEAT 1402_00_2503; EAT/1402/00 25 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Holland Employment, Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Hardman v M Mallon T/A Orchard Lodge Nursing Home EAT/360/01 25 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen QC Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Injury to Feelings Â B F Tuck v Fish Brothers EAT/380/01 26 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen QC Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Adjustments Â B F Tuck v Fish Brothers EAT/380/01 26 Mar 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen Qc Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Reasonable adjustments. [ EATn ] Â Beck v H and P Campbell Limited (Religious/Political Opinion Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 629_97 27 Mar 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Beck v H and P Campbell Limited (Religious/Political Opinion Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 11 27 Mar 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Scottish Environment Protection Agency v Ms Kate Houchin EAT/1189/01 27 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EATn ] Â Scottish Environment Protection Agency v Kate Houchin EAT/1189/01 27 Mar 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability Â Macauley v Homefirst Community Health and Social Services Trust [2002] NIIT 31 27 Mar 2002 NIIT Discrimination (Sex Discrimination) [ Bailii ] Â G W Padley Vegetables Limited v A Theed EAT/0590/01 10 Apr 2002 EAT His Honour Judge Peter Clark Employment, Discrimination The respondent appealed a decision to allow the claimant to amend her claim for race discrimination. She had included details of alleged racial abuse, but claimed only unfair dismissal. No new facts were alleged, and the amendment would be out of time. Following Harvey, the tribunal had said it was a mere mater of labelling, and time limits did not apply. Held: The tribunal was correct. The defendant was not prejudiced because the defence of limitation was still available. 1 Cites Â J L Robertson v Hymers College EAT/1517/00 10 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid QC Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Indirect Â J L Robertson v Hymers College EAT/1517/00 10 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid Qc Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Indirect. [ EAT ] Â L Chigbundu v Central Technology College and P Monnelly EAT/965/99 12 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Prophet Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Mccourt v University of Ulster (Religious/Political Opinion Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 154_00 15 Apr 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mccourt v University of Ulster (Religious/Political Opinion Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 12 15 Apr 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Cunturyan Security Services Ltd v M Kelly EAT/430/00 16 Apr 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Langstaff QC Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Victimisation Â Cunturyan Security Services Ltd v Ms M Kelly EAT/430/00 16 Apr 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Langstaff Qc Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Victimisation. [ EATn ] Â London Borough of Southwark v Jiminez EAT/1326/99 17 Apr 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Bell Discrimination, Employment EAT Contract of Employment - Breach of Contract. 1 Citers [ EAT ] Â Hoyer (Uk) Ltd v S M Capaldi EAT/1154/01 18 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct The parties had agreed to compromise the appeal on the basis that a new trial would be ordered. The EAT had to consider whether the settlement was appropriate. Held: The employers had not accepted during his employment that he was disabled within the section. Having now accepted that he had been treated worse, the only issue was as to whether that treatment had been reasonable under 5(1)(b). The tribunal had held following Quinn that they could not claim proper consideration if they had not considered him disabled. Quinn does not now reflect good practice. The case of Callaghan was to be preferred. The tribunal had misdirected itself. Disability Discrimination Act 1995 5(1)(b) 1 Cites Â Hoyer (Uk)Ltd v S M Capaldi 1154/01 18 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â Â Six Continents Retail Ltd (Formerly Bass Taverns Limited T/A Bass Leisure Retail) v Hughes; EAT 19-Apr-2002 - EAT/1312/00; [2002] UKEAT 1312_00_1904 Â G F Smith v Sabre Cleaning Services Ltd J Bruce EAT/1190/00 22 Apr 2002 EAT Her Honour Judge A Wakefield Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Other Â G F Smith v Sabre Cleaning Services Ltd, J Bruce EAT/1190/00 22 Apr 2002 EAT Her Honour Judge A Wakefield Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Other. [ EATn ] Â A M Soormally v Department of Social Security EAT/1085/00 23 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â A M Soormally v Department of Social Security EAT/1085/00 23 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â London Borough of Greenwich Simon Trotter v Jacinth Browne EAT/604/01 24 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination 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 proceedings were commenced against her. The respondent complained that some findings had been unsupported by evidence, and that the delay on promulgation of the decision was unacceptable. Held: There was evidence to support the points challenged, but discrimination cases are peculiarly fact sensitive and it is therefore more important that decisions should be made whilst the facts remain fresh in the tribunal's mind. There were no findings as to whether the Applicant received less favourable treatment, nor findings as to how the treatment was less favourable. Appeal allowed. Race Relation Act 1976 1 Cites Â Jobling v Corporate Medical Management Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 627 24 Apr 2002 CA Discrimination, Employment Disability Discrimination Act 1995 [ Bailii ] Â London Borough of Greenwich, Simon Trotter v Ms Jacinth Browne EAT/604/01 24 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation. [ EATn ] Â Melbourne v Ministry of Defence [2002] EWCA Civ 754 26 Apr 2002 CA Buxton LJ, Jackson J Employment, Discrimination, Armed Forces Renewed application for permission to appeal from a ruling of the Employment Appeal Tribunal. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â British Medical Association v Chaudhary [2002] UKEAT 1351_01_3004 30 Apr 2002 EAT Employment, Health Professions, Discrimination 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â A Bhadhuri v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council EAT/986/01 30 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination, Employment EAT Race Discrimination - Jurisdiction The applicant challenged dismissal of his claim for direct race discrimination by his employers. He said that his employers failure to support his career progression over a long period of time constituted continuing discrimination. Did the Tribunal ask whether the Respondent had a genuine belief in the reasons put forward as explanation for the assumed less favourable treatment, to test whether there was a basis in fact for such belief. Held: It was clear that the tribunal had properly applied the tests in Anya to the evidence. Though he had been criticised, that criticism had been constructive. Appeal dismissed. Race Relations Act 1976 68(7)(b) 1 Cites Â A Bhadhuri v Doncaster Mbc EAT/986/01 30 Apr 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Jurisdiction. [ EATn ] Â A Jaffrey v Department of Environment and Transport and Regions EAT/0692/01 1 May 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Langstaff QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â A Jaffrey v Department of Environment and Transport and Regions EAT/0692/01 1 May 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Langstaff Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Hamilton v Beardmore [2002] UKEAT 0586_01_0205; EAT/586/01 2 May 2002 EAT Her Honour Judge A Wakefield Employment, Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Victimisation. [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â J Kells v Pilkington Plc EAT/1435/00; [2002] UKEAT 1435_00_0205 2 May 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P) Employment, Discrimination EAT Equal Pay Act 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â Crown Prosecution Service v M Clarke EAT/1254/00 & 770/01 2 May 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Wall Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Crown Prosecution Service v M Clarke EAT/770/01; EAT/1254/00 2 May 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Wall Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct Â Greenwich v Drobia [2002] UKEAT 695_01_0305; EAT/695/01 3 May 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P) Employment, Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Williams v HM Prison Service [2002] EWCA Civ 809 3 May 2002 CA Employment, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Latchman v Reed Business Information Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 729 7 May 2002 CA Discrimination, Employment [ Bailii ] Â The Chief Constable of Cumbria v T M McGlennon EAT/10/01 8 May 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell QC Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct Â The Chief Constable of Cumbria v T M McGlennon EAT/10/01 8 May 2002 EAT Mr Commissioner Howell Qc Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct [ EAT ] Â Surrey Police v R J Marshall EAT/774/01 10 May 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (P) Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EAT ] Â Ahmed and Another v London Borough of Southwark [2002] EWCA Civ 821 20 May 2002 CA Waller LJ Housing, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mack v Belfast City Council and Another (Victimisation/Jurisdiction) [2002] NIFET 110_99 21 May 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mack v Belfast City Council and Another (Victimisation/Jurisdiction) [2002] NIFET 13 21 May 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â A H Sadiq v Leeds City Council, M Tolladay, Duffy, A Mcllroy EAT/11/01 23 May 2002 EAT Ms Recorder Slade Qc Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â A Bari v Aspen Window Group EAT/412/01; EAT/1379/00 23 May 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Wall Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EAT ] Â Lincolnshire Health NHS Trust v S C Aslett EAT/108/02 24 May 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct Â Lincolnshire Health NHS Trust v S C Aslett EAT/108/02 24 May 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â Bedfordshire Police v Liversidge [2002] EWCA Civ 894; [2002] ICR 1135; [2002] Emp LR 998; [2002] IRLR 651; [2002] Po LR 146 24 May 2002 CA Police, Discrimination Race Relations Act 1976 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Willis v Police Authority for Northern Ireland and others (Religious/Political Discrimination/Victimisation) [2002] NIFET 14 29 May 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Willis v Police Authority for Northern Ireland and others (Religious/Political Discrimination/Victimisation) [2002] NIFET 310_98 29 May 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Â Yeboah v Crofton; CA 31-May-2002 - Times, 20 June 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 794; [2002] IRLR 634; [2004] ICR 257 Â Mccreight v Police Ombudsman for Ni (Prospects of Success) [2002] NIFET 14a 5 Jun 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Reid v Royal Mail [2002] NIFET 595_01 5 Jun 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mccreight v Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland [2002] NIFET 469_01 5 Jun 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Reid v Royal Mail (Time Limit) [2002] NIFET 15a 6 Jun 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mccandless v Northern Ireland Public Service Alliance and others [2002] NIFET 109_98 6 Jun 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mccandless v Northern Ireland Public Service Alliance and others (Religious Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 15 6 Jun 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â R Atkin Musopke Bukulu v Safeway Stores Plc [2002] UKEAT 671_01_0608; EAT/671/01 8 Jun 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D Serota Qc Discrimination, Employment EAT Race Discrimination - Indirect. [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â M S Bruce v S Cavalier, Thompsons Solicitors EAT/1283/00 11 Jun 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D M Levy Qc Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Inferring discrimination. [ EATn ] Â Willis v The United Kingdom 36042/97; [2002] ECHR 483; (2002) 35 EHRR 547; [2002] 14-26 ECHR 2002-IV 11 Jun 2002 ECHR Discrimination, Human Rights Discrimination in the payment of 'widows payment' and widowed mother's allowance infringed the rights conferred by article 14 read with article 1 of Protocol 1 but no finding was made about the widow's pension. The risk of the applicant being refused a widow's pension on grounds of sex at a future date was found to be hypothetical since it was not certain that she would otherwise fulfil the statutory conditions for the payment of the benefit on the relevant date. The court awarded Mr Willis £25,000 by way of just satisfaction. European Convention on Human Rights 14 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Blossom Simon v BUPA Care Services, Lesley Cockbain EAT/339/01 11 Jun 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Inferring discrimination. [ EATn ] Â Mccann v Inland Revenue and Another (Religious and Political Discrimination or Victimisation) [2002] NIFET 17 14 Jun 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mccann v Inland Revenue and Another (Religious/Political Discrimination/Victimisation) [2002] NIFET 203_99 14 Jun 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Quick Group Plc v U A Khan EAT/1286/00 20 Jun 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D M Levy QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to Feelings Â Quick Group Plc v U A Khan EAT/1286/00 20 Jun 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D M Levy Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feelings. [ EATn ] Â Mahmoud Ibrahim v C C G (Uk) Ltd EAT/1134/01 24 Jun 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â Ayobiojo v Nalgo Unison-Lambeth [2002] UKEAT 0696_01_2406 24 Jun 2002 EAT Employment, Discrimination 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Mahmoud Ibrahim v C C G (Uk) Ltd EAT/1134/01 24 Jun 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â Schwarzkopf Limited v Desmond Quinn [2002] IRLR 602 25 Jun 2002 SCS Lord Coulsfield Scotland, Employment, Discrimination 1 Cites 1 Citers [ ScotC ] - [ ScotC ] Â Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, P Foote v S Swanson EAT/791/01 26 Jun 2002 EAT Mrs Recorder Cox Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Indirect. [ EATn ] Â M Nelson v Carillion Services Ltd EAT/837/01; [2002] UKEAT 837_01_2606 26 Jun 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Employment, Discrimination EAT Equal Pay Act - 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â North Staffordshire Combined Healthcare NHS Trust v Dr K A Ayes EAT/805/01 27 Jun 2002 EAT Mrs Recorder Cox QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â North Staffordshire Combined Healthcare NHS Trust v Dr K A Ayes EAT/805/01 27 Jun 2002 EAT Mrs Recorder Cox Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Asselman (Nee Coxon) v Rank Xerox UK Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 971 1 Jul 2002 CA Discrimination 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Leeds Rhinos Rugby Club, D Lance, Howes, Gray Hethington v P Sterling EAT/267/01 2 Jul 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D Serota Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feelings. [ EATn ] Â Robertson v Bexley Community Centre (T/A Leisure Link) [2002] UKEAT 1516_00_0407; EAT/1516/00 4 Jul 2002 EAT Justice Wall Employment, Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â Issa v Sandwell Healthcare NHS Trust Lingwood, Bradby and others EAT/929/01; [2002] UKEAT 0929_01_1207 4 Jul 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination, Employment EAT Race Discrimination - Indirect [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Chaudhary v Royal College of Surgeons of Great Britain, Ireland and others [2002] EWCA Civ 1166 5 Jul 2002 CA Discrimination, Health Professions [ Bailii ] Â Mensah v Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hospitals NHS Trust and others [2002] UKEAT 1393_01_0507 5 Jul 2002 EAT Employment, Discrimination 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Ahuja v Inghams (Accountants) Gazette, 26 September 2002 10 Jul 2002 CA Lords Justice Kennedy, Mummery and Sedley Discrimination The claimant sought damages for racial discrimination by her employers. At the Employment Tribunal, the claimant's representative conceded that only one act was within the limitation period, but claim had been made to support that allegation, beyond the evidence. The Employment Appeal Tribunal directed a rehearing for the Tribunal to consider the facts alleged in the claim. Held: The EAT had no power to order the tribunal to consider facts not alleged in the original claim, and only in the evidence at the tribunal. Â Lanzante (T/A Hair UK) v Jefferies [2002] UKEAT 0702_01_1007; EAT/702/01 10 Jul 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination, Employment EAT Sex Discrimination - Injury to Feelings [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Donnelly v Department of Finance and Personnel and Another (Application To Vary Order) [2002] NIFET 555_98 15 Jul 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Â Matthews v The United Kingdom; ECHR 15-Jul-2002 - Times, 30 July 2002; 40302/98; [2002] ECHR 592; [2002] ECHR 597 Â Donnelly v Department of Finance and Personnel and Another (Application To Vary Order) [2002] NIFET 24 15 Jul 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Kyte v Fire Brigades Union EAT/291/01 16 Jul 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Nelson Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EAT ] Â T A Kyte v Fire Brigades Union EAT/291/01 16 Jul 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Nelson Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct 1 Citers Â D H Kirton v Tetrosyl Limited EAT/247/01; [2003] ICR 37; [2002] UKEAT 247_01_2308 17 Jul 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid QC Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â D H Kirton v Tetrosyl Limited EAT/247/01 17 Jul 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid Qc Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EATn ] Â Dr R E Rudzki v University of Sunderland EAT/1341/01 19 Jul 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Indirect Â Rudzki v University of Sunderland EAT/1341/01 19 Jul 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Indirect. [ EATn ] Â HSBC Bank Plc v Steven Clarkson EAT/205/01 22 Jul 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Nelson Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability Â Hsbc Bank Plc v Steven Clarkson EAT/205/01 22 Jul 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Nelson Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EATn ] Â G Arroyo-Valencia v United Road Transport Union Michael Billingham David Higginbottom EAT/418/01 24 Jul 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â Zaiwalla and Co (a Firm) v Walia Times, 01 August 2002; EAT/827/00; EAT/451/00; [2002] IRLR 697 24 Jul 2002 EAT Mr Justice Maurice Kay, Dr D. Grieves and Mr P. R. A. Jacques Employment, Damages, Discrimination The claimant sought aggravated damages for the aggressive way the respondent firm had defended her action for sex discrimination. Held: In exceptional circumstances, and this was one, the tribunal could award additional damages where a respondent behaved in his defence in an over-enthusiastic way: "If a respondent misconducts himself in the defence of a discrimination case, it may amount to victimisation of the applicant in respect of the protected act of bringing the claim. It is easy to imagine cases in which the misconduct amounting to victimisation might only arise at a late stage of the proceedings, perhaps only during the hearing. It seems to us that it would be regrettable if such victimisation could only be compensated by the commencement of further proceedings." Generally a party should be warned in advance that this might be considered, and such awards should remain the exception. The defendant said that the tribunal had not demonstrated its independence, but had restricted his cross examination of the claimant and had made many interruptions. The EAT found the allegation of bias unfounded. Though there had been a delay of three months before promulgation of the decision, there was no reason to think that it was undermined. The defendant had not met the test for alleging perversity as set down in Yeboah. "overenthusiastic litigants and litigants in Employment Tribunals may be tempted to read our conclusions in a way which would give the green light to claims for aggravated damages in respect of alleged misconduct in the defence of proceedings almost as a matter of routine. They would be wrong to do so. " Sex Discrimination Act 1975 65 1 Cites 1 Citers [ EATn ] Â G Arroyo-Valencia v United Road Transport Union, Michael Billingham, David Higginbottom EAT/418/01 24 Jul 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â McNicol v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Limited Times, 26 August 2002; Gazette, 03 October 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1074; [2002] ICR 1498; [2002] IRLR 711; [2002] Emp LR 1097; (2003) 71 BMLR 1 26 Jul 2002 CA The Vice-Chancellor, Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Wall Discrimination The Disability Rights Commission sought leave to intervene in a claim between the parties for disability discrimination. Held: The Commission has important duties, but that did not give it the right, save in exceptional circumstances, to intervene to make representations in an action before a court or tribunal. Mummery LJ said that the approach a court should adopt when faced with medical evidence as to mental impairment is as follows: "The essential question in each case is whether, on sensible interpretation of the relevant evidence, including the expert medical evidence and reasonable inferences which can be made from all the evidence, the applicant can fairly be described as having a physical or mental impairment." Disability Rights Commission Act 1999 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Hobson v London Borough of Hackney [2002] EWCA Civ 1237 30 Jul 2002 CA Peter Gibson, Arden LJJ, Cresswell J Employment, Discrimination Appeal against rejection of claim of sex discrimination. [ Bailii ] Â Â Hobson v Hackney London Borough Council; CA 31-Jul-2002 - Times, 22 October 2002 Â Mccormick v Department of Economic Development [2002] NIFET 297_98 2 Aug 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mccormick v Department of Economic Development and Another (Application for Review) [2002] NIFET 19 2 Aug 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Baker and 15 others v the Home Office EAT/835/01; [2002] UKEAT 804_01_0808; EAT/804/01 7 Aug 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid QC Discrimination, Employment EAT Equal Pay Act EAT Equal Pay Act - (no sub-topic). [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Mccormick v Boxmore Plastics Ltd (Religious/Political Discrimination/Dismissal/Breach of Contract/Disability Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 18 7 Aug 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mccormick v Boxmore Plastics Ltd [2002] NIFET 417_99 7 Aug 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â De Wet v Network Neighbourhood Ltd [2002] NIIT 100 14 Aug 2002 NIIT Northern Ireland, Discrimination, Employment Breach of Contract/ Sex Discrimination/ Unlawful Deductions/ Race Discrimination/Unfair Dismissal [ Bailii ] Â The Governing Body of Addey and Stanhope School v V EAT/349/02 15 Aug 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D Serota QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation 1 Citers Â Ms Gibbs v Institute for Optimum Nutrition EAT/1139/01 16 Aug 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D Serota Qc Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EATn ] Â Gibbs v Institute for Optimum Nutrition EAT/1139/01 16 Aug 2002 EAT His Hon Judge D Serota QC Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability Â O Maolain v Equality Commission and others (Jurisdiction) [2002] NIFET 20 26 Aug 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â O Maolain v the Equality Commission and others [2002] NIFET 141_02 26 Aug 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â S Thomas, Comsoft Limited v J Jobinson EAT/737/01 27 Aug 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feeling. [ EAT ] Â S Thomas Comsoft Limited v J Jobinson EAT/737/01 27 Aug 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to Feelings Â Mccue v British Geological Survey and others (Religious/Political Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 21 27 Aug 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Mccue v 1British Geological Survey and others [2002] NIFET 443_97 27 Aug 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Gorman v Hill and Another (T/A Skelton and Co) [2002] NIFET 2375_00 28 Aug 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â P R Hubberstey v South Ribble Borough Council EAT/0097/01 5 Sep 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Underhill Qc Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â P R Hubberstey v South Ribble Borough Council EAT/0097/01 5 Sep 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Underhill QC Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct Â Arnold v Department of Finance and Personnel (Application for Review) [2002] NIFET 22 6 Sep 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Arnold v Department of Finance and Personnel [2002] NIFET 545_97 6 Sep 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Seray-Wurie v Skinners' Company School for Girls and Another [2002] EWCA Civ 1393 6 Sep 2002 CA Tuckey LJ Employment, Discrimination The claimant sought leave to appeal against rejection of her appeals against dismissal of her claims for race discrimination and unfair dismissal. Held: The Tribunal had properly dealt with the allegations of bias. The EAT had also made appropriate enquireis and satisfied itself on the point. Leave refused. [ Bailii ] Â Du Toit and Vos v Minister for Welfare and Population Development (2002) 13 BHRC 187; [2002] ZACC 20; CCT 40/01 10 Sep 2002 Commonwealth, Constitutional, Human Rights, Discrimination (South African Constitutional Court) Prospective adoptive parents were a same-sex couple who challenged laws preventing them from adopting. The court said: "In their current form the impugned provisions exclude from their ambit potential joint adoptive parents who are unmarried, but who are partners in permanent same-sex life partnerships and who would otherwise meet the criteria set out in section 18 of the Child Care Act… Their exclusion surely defeats the very essence and social purpose of adoption which is to provide the stability, commitment, affection and support important to a child's development, which can be offered by suitably qualified persons… Excluding partners in same sex life partnerships from adopting children jointly where they would otherwise be suitable to do so is in conflict with the principle [of the paramountcy of the interests of the child]… It is clear from the evidence in this case that even though persons such as the applicants are suitable to adopt children jointly and provide them with family care, they cannot do so. The impugned provisions … thus deprive children of the possibility of a loving and stable family life… The provisions of the Child Care Act thus fail to accord paramountcy to the best interests of the children." 1 Citers [ Saflii ] Â Crofton v Yeboah EAT/475/00 12 Sep 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feelings. 1 Cites [ EAT ] Â Crofton v Yeboah EAT/475/00 12 Sep 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feelings 1 Cites 1 Citers Â A Power v Panasonic UK Ltd EAT/747/01; [2003] IRLR 151; [2002] UKEAT 747_01_1709 17 Sep 2002 EAT Ms Recorder Slade QC Discrimination, Employment EAT The tribunal had held that the applicant was not a disabled person within the meaning of the Act because only of an addiction to alcohol. This was not to be treated as an impairment. She also suffered from depression. Held: The tribunal should have determined whether the depression constituted an impairment within the meaning of the Act without inquiring into its cause. "Further, in our judgment, the employment tribunal erred in its approach, as evidenced in the last sentence of paragraph 24 of its decision. It is not material to a decision as to whether a person is suffering a disability within the meaning of the Act, to consider how the impairment from which they are suffering was caused. What is material is to ascertain whether the disability from which they are suffering at the material time is a disability within the meaning of the Act or whether, where it is relevant as in this case, it is an impairment which is excluded by reason of the Regulations from being treated as such a disability." 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and Others C-320/00; [2002] EUECJ C-320/00; [2003] ICR 1092 17 Sep 2002 ECJ Case C-320/00 European, Employment, Discrimination The employees claimed sex discrimination, and sought to have as comparators, male employees of an employer who had previously employed some of them, before a TUPE transfer of the services supplied. The Court of Appeal referred to the court the question of whether they could rely upon Article 141(1) to base such a comparison. Held: There was nothing explicit in the wording to restrict the comparison. However, here there was no one body answerable for the inequality and the comparison was invalid. There is, in this connection, nothing in the wording of article 141(1) EC to suggest that the applicability of that provision is limited to situations in which men and women work for the same employer. The court has held that the principle established by that article may be invoked before national courts in particular in cases of discrimination arising directly from legislative provisions or collective labour agreements, as well as in cases in which work is carried out in the same establishment or service, whether private or public: see, inter alia, Defrenne [1976] ICR 547, 568, para 40; Macarthys Ltd v Smith (Case 129/79 [1980] ICR 672, 690, para 10, and Jenkins v Kingsgate (Clothing Productions) Ltd (Case 96/80) [1981] ICR 592, 613-614, para 17. However, where, as in the main proceedings here, the differences identified in the pay conditions of workers performing equal work or work of equal value cannot be attributed to a single source, there is no body which is responsible for the inequality and which could restore equal treatment. Such a situation does not come within the scope of article 141(1) EC. The work and the pay of those workers cannot therefore be compared on the basis of that provision. In view of all the of the foregoing, the answer to the first question must be that a situation such as that in the main proceedings, in which the differences identified in the pay conditions of workers of different sex performing equal work or work of equal value cannot be attributed to a single source, does not come within the scope of article 141(1) EC." EC Treaty 119 141(1) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Y Essa v Laing Ltd EAT/697/01 18 Sep 2002 EAT His Honour Judge D Serota QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feelings Race Relations Act 1976 Â Y Essa v Laing Ltd 697/01 18 Sep 2002 EAT His Honour Judge D Serota Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Injury to feelings. [ EATn ] Â Coogan v Norfil Ltd (In Receivership) [2002] NIFET 23 23 Sep 2002 FENI Discrimination (Religious/Political Discrimination) [ Bailii ] Â Coogan v Norfil Ltd [2002] NIFET 451_99 23 Sep 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Elaine Glennie v Aberdeen City Council EATS/0002/02; [2002] UKEAT 0002_02_2409 24 Sep 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Employment, Scotland, Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Victimisation [ EATn ] Â Mekini v DSG Retail Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1524 24 Sep 2002 CA Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Carney v Wood Effects Company Ltd (561/02 Disability Discrimination) [2002] NIIT 131 26 Sep 2002 NIIT Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â P Singh v University Hospital NHS Trust EAT/1409/01 27 Sep 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â P Singh v University Hospital NHS Trust EAT/1409/01 27 Sep 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct Â Wood v Nugent and Another [2002] NIFET 327_99 2 Oct 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Wood v Nugent and Another (Religious Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 26 2 Oct 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â S B Jangra v Gate Gourmet London Ltd Gazette, 28 November 2002; EAT/608/01; [2002] UKEAT 608_01_2510 3 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Adjustments The claimant had suffered a cut finger at work. Severe complications resulted in her eventual dismissal for incapacity. She sought to allege disability discrimination, saying the employer had failed to consider possible adjustments. Held: The tribunal had to follow a three stage test, asking whether the employer was obliged to make adjustments, had he complied with that duty, and would the treatment have been justified if the duty had been satisfied. Here the employer had concluded that the applicant would have been incapable of any employment it could offer. That consideration satisfied its duty. Disability Discrimination Act 1995 5 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â Coxon v Rank Xerox Ltd Times, 13 December 2002; Gazette, 23 January 2003; EAT/1116/ 4 Oct 2002 EAT Wall J, Hougham, Clancy Discrimination, Employment EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct The applicant appealed a finding that she had been fairly dismissed from her employment for gross misconduct. Held: There was a clear distinction between a finding of a breach of trust by an employee and a finding that the relationship of trust and confidence between employer and employee had broken down at the sole fault of the employee. The standard of evidence required to establish the former were higher. Here gross misconduct had not been shown, but the finding that the relationship of trust and confidence had broken down because of the applicant's behaviour could, itself, justify the finding that the dismissal was fair. 1 Cites Â Ms J S Coxon v Rank Xerox UK Ltd EAT/1116/ 4 Oct 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Wall Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Hashimoto Ltd v G Mcintosh EAT/1151/01 8 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â Hashimoto Ltd v G Mcintosh EA/1157/01 8 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Jurisdiction. [ EATn ] Â Hashimoto Ltd v G Mcintosh EA/1157/01 8 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Jurisdiction Â Keery v Police Authority for Northern Ireland [2002] NIIT 453_97 8 Oct 2002 NIIT Discrimination, Employment Religious/Political Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Hashimoto Ltd v G Mcintosh EAT/1151/01 8 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct Â Osibanjo Ete and Co v Pinnock [2002] EWCA Civ 1529 8 Oct 2002 CA Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Keery v Police Authority for Northern Ireland (Religious/Political Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 27 8 Oct 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â European Roma Rights Centre and 6 others vTthe Immigration Officer at Prague Airport, The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWHC 1989 (Admin) 8 Oct 2002 QBD The Honourable Mr Justice Stanley Burnton The Honourable Justice Burton < Immigration, Human Rights, Discrimination There is an "administrative, financial and indeed social burden borne as a result of failed asylum seekers". Immigration Act 1971 1 2 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Skeery v Police Authority for Northern Ireland [2002] NIFET 453_97 8 Oct 2002 FENI Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Nottingham City Council v J E Redmond EAT/876/01 10 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct Â Nottingham City Council v Ms J E Redmond EAT/876/01 10 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Bax Global Limited v F French EAT/812/01 11 Oct 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Wall Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Other. [ EATn ] Â Bax Global Limited v F French EAT/812/01 11 Oct 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Wall Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Other Â Clive Williams v The Devon and Cornwall Constabulary, The Devon and Cornwall Constabulary Widows Orphans and Compassionate Fund EAT/283/00 14 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke QC Discrimination, Police EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation Â Williams v The Devon and Cornwall Constabulary, The Devon and Cornwall Constabulary Widows Orphans and Compassionate Fund EAT/283/00 14 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation. [ EAT ] Â Lynch v Miller and Company Ltd (T/A Spar Supermarket) and Another (Order To Dis Originating Application) [2002] NIFET 25 15 Oct 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â D Joy v Connex South Central EAT/975/01 17 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â D Joy v Connex South Central EAT/975/01 17 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct Â Regina (Tamil Information Centre) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 30 October 2002; Gazette, 14 November 2002; [2002] EWHC 2155 (Admin) 18 Oct 2002 Admn Forbes J Administrative, Immigration, Discrimination The Respondent had authorised immigration officers to act in a way which would otherwise be a discrimination against Tamils under the 1976 Act. They complained that authorisations had been effectively and unlawfully delegated. Held: The evaluations would in practice be carried out by individual immigration officers, and the decisions would be theirs. The authorisation therefore involved an improper delegation of the respondents powers. It was not justified as a legitimate way of achieving the respondents targets. A licence to discriminate should be expected to be subject to strict control, and parliament had intended that it be exercised by the respondent personally. Race Relations Act 1976 19D - Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 1 [ Bailii ] Â Johnson and Johnson Medical Ltd and Filmer v K Filmer and Johnson and Johnson Medical Ltd EAT/34/02 & EAT/35/02 21 Oct 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P) Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Reasonable adjustments. [ EATn ] Â Bradford Hospital NHS Trust v W Al-Shabib EAT/709/01 21 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid QC Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Inferring Discrimination The Trust appealed a finding of race discrimination. Held: The tribunal had made a finding of victimisation, but no such claim had been in the application, nor mentioned during the hearing. That finding could not stand. The tribunal had found that the Trust had behaved unreasonably, but there had been no comparator, and no evidential basis for constructing one. It had erred in law in moving from a finding of unreasonable behaviour to a finding of discrimination, which required a finding that he had been treated worse than a comparator would have been. Â Ali v Office for National Statistics [2002] UKEAT 672_01_2110 21 Oct 2002 EAT Employment, Discrimination 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Bradford Hospital NHS Trust v W Al-Shabib EAT/709/01 21 Oct 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J R Reid Qc Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Inferring discrimination. [ EATn ] Â Samuel v Home Office and Another [2002] EWCA Civ 1521 21 Oct 2002 CA Judge LJ, May LJ Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Johnson and Johnson Medical Ltd and Filmer v K Filmer and Johnson and Johnson Medical Ltd EAT/34/02; EAT/35/02 21 Oct 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (P) Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Adjustments Â Dinardo Partnership v Donald Alexander Bingham EATS/0006/02 22 Oct 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Compensation Â Â Foley v The United Kingdom; ECHR 22-Oct-2002 - 39197/98; [2002] ECHR 682; [2002] ECHR 687; (2003) 36 EHRR 15 Â Dinardo Partnership v Donald Alexander Bingham EATS/0006/02 22 Oct 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Compensation. [ EATn ] Â Hackett v Moy Park Ltd (Religious Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 28 22 Oct 2002 FENI Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Hackett v Moy Park Ltd [2002] NIFET 340_99 22 Oct 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Gallant v Church of Scotland Board of Social Responsibility EATS/0005/02; [2002] UKEAT 0005_02_2510 25 Oct 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination, Employment EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Manson v Ministry of Defence [2002] UKEAT 0289_02_3010 30 Oct 2002 EAT Employment, Discrimination, European Part-Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Ila Bhanot v Down Space Ltd EAT/856/02 1 Nov 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Altman Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Other [ EATn ] Â British Medical Association v Chaudhary [2002] EWCA Civ 1710 1 Nov 2002 CA Discrimination, Health Professions 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Ila Bhanot v Down Space Ltd EAT/856/02 1 Nov 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Altman Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Other Â Deman v Association of University Teachers [2002] EWCA Civ 1732 1 Nov 2002 CA Discrimination Application for permission to appeal. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Mensah v Heatherwood and Wexham Park Hospitals NHS Trust and others [2002] EWCA Civ 1610 1 Nov 2002 CA Discrimination 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Kymanywa v London Borough of Hackney [2002] EWCA Civ 1703 1 Nov 2002 CA Mummery LJ Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â The London Borough of Tower Hamlet v Dr M A Ogunlokun EAT/762/01 5 Nov 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Wall Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ EATn ] Â Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza [2003] 2 WLR 1533; Times, 14 November 2002; Gazette, 09 January 2003; [2002] EWCA Civ 1533; [2003] Ch 380 5 Nov 2002 CA Kennedy, Buxton, Keene LJJ Discrimination, Landlord and Tenant, Human Rights, Housing The applicant sought to succeed to the tenancy of his deceased homosexual partner as his partner rather than as a member of his family. Held: A court is bound by any decision within the normal hierachy of domestic authority as to the meaning of an article of the Convention, in the same way as it is bound by such a decision as to the meaning of purely domestic law. The Convention must be construed as a living instrument. The decision in Fitzpatrick should be revisited. Sexual orientation is now clearly recognised as an impermissible ground of discrimination. Such discrimination need not be analysed as a form of sex discrimination, but rather more generally, following Salgueiro. Paragraph 2 clearly infringed the Convention. It is the duty of the courts to protect minorities. Buxton LJ held that: "But I have no hesitation in saying that issues of discrimination, which it is conceded we are concerned with in this case, do have high constitutional importance, and are issues that the courts should not shrink from. In such cases, deference has only a minor role to play." Rent Act 1977 Sch 1 Para 2 - European Convention on Human Rights Art 12 Art 14 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â A v Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police and Another Times, 14 November 2002; Gazette, 09 January 2003; [2002] EWCA Civ 1584; [2003] ICR 161 5 Nov 2002 CA Kennedy, Buxton, Keene LJJ Discrimination, Police, Employment, European, Human Rights The appellant had undergone a male to female sex change, but was refused employment by the respondent before the Human Rights Act came into effect. Held: Although the Human Rights Act could not apply, the act was in breach of the Equal Treatment Directive and discrimination. The 1999 regulations were incompatible with the provisions of the Directive. The respondent said that it was a requirement of the job that an officer be ready to search a person of the same sex, under the 1984 Act. Following Goodwin, it was no longer permissible to treat the applicant other than as a female. It is now necessary to apply the law as developed by the European convention jurisprudence. It was necessary to decide first what is "the appellant's legal gender". There had been gender reassignment surgery and the Court concluded that the appellant had become female. Equal Treatment Directive (76/207/EEC) (OJ 1976 L39/40) - Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Part II - Sex Discrimination (Gender Re-Assignment) Regulations 1999 (1999 No 1102) - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 54 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â F P Mccann Ltd v Ballymoney Borough Council [2002] NIFET 300_99 6 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Dime v Brent, Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster Mental Health NHS Trust [2002] UKEAT 0806_02_0611 6 Nov 2002 EAT Employment, Discrimination 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â FP McCann Ltd v Ballymoney Borough Council [2002] NIFET 30 6 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination (Discrimination Religious Belief) [ Bailii ] Â Ms S Devani v Nottingham City Council, Ms P O'Brien, Ms S Gregory, N Hanson EAT/827/01 7 Nov 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Wall Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Other [ EATn ] Â A M Vyas v London Borough of Camden EAT/1153/01 7 Nov 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Reasonable adjustments. [ EATn ] Â Sahota v Wolverhampton City Council [2002] UKEAT 0762_02_0811 8 Nov 2002 EAT Discrimination race discrimination and disability discrimination in recruitment. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Strategic Rail Authority v Ms I Bhadresa EAT/861/02 8 Nov 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Pugsley Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct. [ EATn ] Â Kerr v Queens University Belfast (Application Out of Time) [2002] NIFET 193_01 8 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Kerr v Queens University Belfast (Application Out of Time) [2002] NIFET 31 8 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Strategic Rail Authority v I Bhadresa EAT/861/02 8 Nov 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Pugsley Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Direct Â Ayobiojo v Nalgo Unison-Lambeth [2002] UKEAT 696_01_1311 13 Nov 2002 EAT Employment, Discrimination Appeal against strike oout of claim as vexatious or frivolous. 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Dr T O'Keefe v National School of Hypnosis and Psychotherapy EAT/1065/01; [2002] UKEAT 1065_01_1311 13 Nov 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Pugsley Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Direct 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] Â Maguire v Northern Ireland Railways Company Ltd and others [2002] NIFET 414_96 13 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â College of Ripon and York St John v Dr C C Hobbs EAT/585/00 14 Nov 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President) Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. 1 Cites [ EATn ] Â Sheridan v Potts and Another (Dismissed Application, Failure To Comply With Order) [2002] NIFET 29 15 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Magee v Lisburn Borough Council and others (Application Out of Time) [2002] NIFET 32 15 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Securicor Custodial Services Ltd v M Williams, W Whitehorne EAT/0042/02 15 Nov 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Altman Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Other [ EATn ] Â Sibley vTthe Girl's Day School Trust, Norwich High School EAT/1368/01 15 Nov 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Burke QC Discrimination, Employment EAT Sex Discrimination - Equal treatment directive EAT Sex Discrimination - Equal treatment directive. 1 Cites [ EATn ] Â Securicor Custodial Services Ltd v M Willia W Whitehorne EAT/0042/02 15 Nov 2002 EAT His Hon Judge J Altman Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Other Â Magee v Lisburn Borough Council and others [2002] NIFET 32_02 15 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Sheridan v Potts and Another [2002] NIFET 272_01 19 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Douglas McFarlane v Shell (UK) Ltd EATS/0016/02; [2002] UKEAT 0016_02_2011 20 Nov 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination, Employment EAT The tribunal asked whether the claimant was disabled within the Act. He suffered depression, but the tribunal had found it not substantial and not capable of lasting more than 12 months. EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. Disability Discrimination Act 1995 1 [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Bakshi v Consignia Plc and Another [2002] EWCA Civ 1816 21 Nov 2002 CA Sedley LJ Employment, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â A Williams v Y K K (Uk) Limited EAT/408/01 22 Nov 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Elias Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Disability. [ EATn ] Â A Willia v Y K K (Uk) Limited EAT/408/01 22 Nov 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Elias Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Jurisdiction Â Stitt v Belfast City Council [2002] NIFET 190_98 25 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Stitt and Another v Belfast City Council (Dismissed Application) [2002] NIFET 33 25 Nov 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Gurung, Pun and Thapa v Ministry of Defence Times, 28 November 2002; [2002] EWHC 2463 (Admin) 27 Nov 2002 QBD McCombe J Armed Forces, Human Rights, Discrimination, Immigration The applicants were British Nepalese soldiers who had been imprisoned by the Japanese in the second world war. They challenged the decision of the respondent in November 2000 to exclude them from a compensation scheme, but to allow other British nationals from India who had also been imprisoned. Held: The decision to exclude them was irrational. It offended the common law principle of equality before the law, and was discriminatory under the Convention. It was permissible for the government not to seek compensation on behalf of nationals of other states which had themselves reached a settlement with Japan, but that did not apply to these claimants. Standards which may have applied in 1955 need not be applied now. The ABCIFER case was to de distinguished because that case did not involve any element of race discrimination as did this. European Convention on Human Rights 8 14 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Hendricks v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Times, 06 December 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1686; [2003] IRLR 96; [2003] 1 All ER 654; [2002] All ER (D) 407; [2003] ICR 530 27 Nov 2002 CA Judge, Mummery, May LJJ Discrimination, Police, Employment The appellant appealed a finding of the Employment Appeal Tribunal against her. She had complained of sex and race discrimination. She alleged that the Tribunal had concentrated on the issues of policy within the respondent police force. Held: The true issues were how in fact the complainant had been treated, and the Tribunal had concentrated too much on what were the policies of the Respondent. Attempts should be made to concentrate on the most recent and most serious allegations to limit the scope of the hearings. 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â London Borough of Hackney v K E Ada EAT/1318/01 4 Dec 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Elias Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Injury to Feelings Â McCombe v Ministry of Defence [2002] NIIT 171; [2002] NIIT 1034_02 6 Dec 2002 NIIT Employment, Discrimination (Sex Discrimination) [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Woods v Mccartney and Another (Political Opinion Discrimination) [2002] NIFET 34 10 Dec 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â A J B Ouston T/A Jo Ouston and Co, Ms Catriona Macintyre-Beon v Ms Catriona Macintyre-Beon &, A J B Ouston T/A Jo Ouston and Co EAT/171/01 & EAT/778/01 10 Dec 2002 EAT His Honour Judge Altman Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Others [ EATn ] Â Anthony Jon Taylor v Dumfries and Galloway Citizens Advice Services EAT/554/01; EATS/0021/02; [2002] UKEAT 554_01_1709 10 Dec 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Employment, Discrimination, Scotland EAT Procedural Issues - Employment Tribunal - Disability Discrimination - Compensation. EAT Disability Discrimination - Compensation 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ EATn ] - [ EATn ] Â A J B Ouston T/A Jo Ouston and Co Catriona Macintyre-Beon v Catriona Macintyre-Beon and A J B Ouston T/A Jo Ouston and Co EAT/778/01; EAT/171/01; [2002] UKEAT 0171_01_1012 10 Dec 2002 EAT His Honour Judge Altman Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Others [ Bailii ] Â Woods v Mccartney and Another [2002] NIFET 287_00 10 Dec 2002 FENI Discrimination Political Opinion Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Archibald v Fife Council EATS/0025/02; [2002] UKEAT 0025_02_1212 12 Dec 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination, Employment EAT Disability Discrimination - Adjustments EAT Disability Discrimination - Reasonable adjustments. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Dr A Sen v the British Council EAT/1456/01 12 Dec 2002 EAT The Honourable Mr Justice Burton (President) Discrimination EAT Sex Discrimination - Indirect. [ EATn ] Â Messrs Caesar and Howie v Veronica Cosgrove EATS/0022/02 13 Dec 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord J Ohnston Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Compensation Â Veronica Cosgrove v Messrs Caesar and Howie EATS/0023/02 13 Dec 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Compensation Â Carson v Social Security Agency and others (Disability Discrimination) [2002] NIIT 178 13 Dec 2002 NIIT Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Veronica Cosgrove v Messrs Caesar and Howie EATS/0023/02 13 Dec 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord Johnston Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Compensation. [ EATn ] Â Messrs Caesar and Howie v Veronica Cosgrove EATS/0022/02 13 Dec 2002 EAT The Honourable Lord J Ohnston Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Compensation [ EATn ] Â McFetridge v Grampian Country Foods Ltd and others (Application for Review) [2002] NIFET 37 15 Dec 2002 FENI Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â McFetridge v Grampian Country Foods Ltd and others (Application for Review) [2002] NIFET 452_98 15 Dec 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â L Turner v Scope (A Registered Charity) EAT/0071/02 18 Dec 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Timothy Brennan Qc Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Less favourable treatment. [ EATn ] Â Turner v Scope (A Registered Charity) [2002] UKEAT 0071_02_1812 18 Dec 2002 EAT Timothy Brennan QC Rec Employment, Discrimination Appeal from rejection of claim for constructive unfair dismissal and of discrimination. Disability Discrimination Act 1995 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Lynch v Seagate Technology (Ireland) (Preliminary Issue/Disability) [2002] NIIT 183 18 Dec 2002 NIIT Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â L Turner v Scope (A Registered Charity) EAT/0071/02 18 Dec 2002 EAT Mr Recorder Timothy Brennan QC Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Less favourable treatment Â Rothwell v The Committee for the Time Being of the Gorse Hill Working Men's Club EAT/1435/01 19 Dec 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Mcmullen Qc Discrimination EAT Disability Discrimination - Other. [ EAT ] Â Hertfordshire County Council v Mullings [2002] UKEAT 568_02_1912; EAT/568/02 19 Dec 2002 EAT His Hon Judge Clark Employment, Discrimination EAT Race Discrimination - Direct [ Bailii ] - [ EAT ] Â Smyth v Department of Agriculture [2002] NIFET 185_98 20 Dec 2002 FENI Northern Ireland, Discrimination [ Bailii ] Â Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2) Times, 27 December 2002; Gazette, 13 March 2003; [2003] ICR 318; [2002] EWCA Civ 1871; [2003] IRLR 102 20 Dec 2002 CA Lord Justice Jonathan Parker, Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Ward Damages, Discrimination, Employment The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of £25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed. Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment tribunal decision. It did not look to see whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal had erred in law in reviewing that decision (Hennessy). This did not change with Civil Procedure Rules 52.11. Courts should be reluctant to award very substantial sums for injury to feelings. The most serious cases should be in the bracket £15,000 to £25,000, and the top figure should be exceeded only in the most exceptional cases. The court set out three broad elements of the compensation to be awarded in such cases. From £5,000 to £15,000 is appropriate for other serious cases. £500 to £5,000 is appropriate for not serious cases, including one off acts. A sum of less than £500 should not be awarded, since this would appear an insult. Civil Procedure Rules 52.11 - Sex Discrimination Act 1975 66(4) - Employment Tribunals Act 1996 21 35 37 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Ahmed v Governing Body of the University of Oxford and Another Times, 17 January 2003; Gazette, 13 March 2003; [2002] EWCA Civ 1907; [2003] 1 WLR 995 20 Dec 2002 CA Lord Justice Laws, The Master Of The Rolls, Lord Justice Waller Discrimination The claimant sought damages for race discrimination. He appealed a dismissal of his claim, suggesting that the assessor's role had been misunderstood. Held: The structure of the Act recognised the particular difficulties in assessing evidence in race discrimination cases, by requiring experienced lay persons to sit with the chair. There was no direct useful comparison between their role in race cases and their role in other forms of litigation. They were there to assist the judge in evaluating the evidence, in the broadest way. Where assessors were given directions on the law, such directions should be given in public, and where they contributed expert evidence, that would require the parties to have opportunity to respond. The procedure of reaching a decision together remained confidential. The section would not be working if judges consistently went against the agreed opinion of the assessors. Race Relations Act 1976 67(4) [ Bailii ] Â
		Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.

swarb.co.uk - law index

Discrimination - From: 2002 To: 2002