The claimant sought to bring an action for race discrimination. The defendant argued that the alleged acts of discrimination took place whilst he was on a posting abroad in Cyprus after serving 16 years in England, and that therefore the tribunal did not have jurisdiction. The EAT considered that the question had to be looked at as at the date of the alleged act.
Held: The claimant’s appeal succeeded The statute was not explicit. The indications were however that the court was to look at the entire course of the employment to see whether the court had jurisdiction. ‘The history of the employment relationship has a greater bearing on protection from racial discrimination than the geography of where the alleged discriminatory acts occurred or where the applicant was when they occurred.’ Carver had been misinterpreted by the EAT, and other authorities were not binding.
Judges:
Mummery Tuckey Clarke LJJ
Citations:
[2005] EWCA Civ 413, Times 09-May-2005
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Saggar v Ministry of Defence EAT 25-May-2004
Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, . .
Cited – Archibald v Fife Council HL 1-Jul-2004
The claimant was employed as a street sweeper. She suffered injury to her health making it difficult to do her work. She was dismissed, and claimed that being disabled, the employer had not made reasonable adjustments to find alternative work for . .
Cited – Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions HL 19-Jun-2003
The court considered whether discriminatory acts after the termination of employment were caught by the respective anti-discrimination Acts. The acts included a failure to give proper references. They pursued claims on the basis of victimisation . .
Cited – Carver (Nee Mascarenhas) v Saudi Arabian Airlines CA 17-Mar-1999
The applicant was recruited in Saudi Arabia in 1986 as a flight attendant under a contract expressed to be subject to Saudi Arabian law. After being trained in Jeddah, and then employed in India for four years, she was transferred to be based in . .
Cited – Haughton v Olau Line (UK) Ltd CA 1986
The applicant was a cashier on a ship. She made a complaint of sex harassment and discrimination. The defendant denied that the court had jurisdiction because she worked abroad.
Held: Her work was done mainly outside Great Britain.
Neill . .
Cited – Deria v General Council of British Shipping 1986
The claimant alleged race discrimination by an employment agency against when he applied for work on a British registered ship, which was not an establishment in Great Britain at the relevant time. At the time of refusal it was not contemplated or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination
Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.224480