Two claimants, Nigerian women, came illegally to work as domestics. They suffered severe abuse by their employers. Whilst each received substantial awards, they appealed now from rejection of their claims for discrimination based upon the advantage taken of their unlawful immigration status.
Held: Immigration status was not to be equated with ‘nationality’ for the purpose of the Race Relations and Equality Acts. There were many non-British nationals working in the United Kingdom who did not share the particular dependence and vulnerability of these migrant domestic workers. On the indirect discrimination claim, the court found that the mistreatment of migrant workers was not a PCP. This factual situation had nothing to do with the kind of mischief which indirect discrimination is intended to address.
Maurice Kay VP CA, Ryder, Underhill LJJ
[2014] EWCA Civ 279, [2014] Eq LR 243, [2014] IRLR 448, [2014] WLR(D) 128, [2014] ICR 571, [2014] 1 WLR 3636
Bailii, WLRD
Equality Act 2010 13(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
At EAT – Akwiwu and Another v Onu EAT 1-May-2013
EAT Race Discrimination : Direct
Indirect
Post Employment
UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGES
NATIONAL MINIMUM WAGE
WORKING TIME REGULATIONS
The Claimant was a Nigerian woman who had . .
Cited – Rowstock Ltd v Jessemey EAT 5-Mar-2013
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Polkey deduction
AGE DISCRIMINATION – Dismissal
VICTIMISATION – Post-employment
FACTS
The employee was dismissed on grounds of retirement, having reached an age over . .
Cited by:
At CA – Taiwo and Another v Olaigbe and Others SC 22-Jun-2016
The claimants had been brought here illegally to act as servants for the defendants. They were taken advantage of and abused. They made several claims, but now appealed against rejection of their claims for discrimination. The court was asked . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination
Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.522396
