The court considered the remedies and routes of appeal available to individuals who claim to have suffered from discrimination, victimisation, harassment or detriment in the treatment that they have received from a qualifications body. In particular, it concerns the jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunal to hear and determine complaints against qualifications bodies under Part 5 of the Equality Act 2010.
Moore-Bick LJ said: ‘the words ‘by virtue of an enactment’ in section 120(7) are directed to cases in which specific provision is made in legislation for an appeal, or proceedings in the nature of an appeal, in relation to decisions of a particular body, as, for example, in Khan v General Medical Council [1996] ICR 1032. They are not . . intended to refer to the general right to seek judicial review merely because, since 1981, that happens to have been put on a statutory footing.’
Moore-Bick VP CA, Kitchin LJJ, Ryder LJ SPT
[2016] EWCA Civ 172, [2016] WLR(D) 164, 150 BMLR 90, [2016] IRLR 458, [2016] ICR 628, [2016] Med LR 211
Bailii, WLRD
Equality Act 2010
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – The General Medical Council v Dickson, Haywood, Dr Michalak EAT 25-Nov-2014
The Claimant complained to an Employment Tribunal that she had been discriminated against by the GMC (a qualifications body). The GMC contended that section 120(7) Equality Act precluded jurisdiction, since judicial review afforded an appeal for the . .
See Also – Michalak, Regina (on The Application of) v General Medical Council Admn 22-Jul-2011
Dr M sought judicial review of a decision by the respondent to continue its investigation of her by the Fitness to Practice panel. That panel, after hearing substantial evidence had to restart on the panel medical member was unable to continue with . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Michalak v General Medical Council and Others SC 1-Nov-2017
Dr M had successfully challenged her dismissal and recovered damages for unfair dismissal and race discrimination. In the interim, Her employer HA had reported the dismissal to the respondent who continued their proceedings despite the decision in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Discrimination, Judicial Review
Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.561214