The claimant’s claim for race discrimination had been dismissed on appeal by the EAT. He now appealed to restore the judgement of the employment tribunal. He had begun an action against his employer, and then unsuccessfully applied for employment with the respondent. He later discovered that there had been conversations between the two employers.
Held: The employment tribunal had found that since it was not satisfied that the interviewers had reason not to employ him, they must have known of the race discrimination claim. Knowledge of the discrimination claim is a pre-requisite to a finding of victimisation. The tribunal had not been free to make such an inference.
Judges:
Lord Justice Ward And Lord Justice Keene
Citations:
[2001] EWCA Civ 2005
Links:
Statutes:
Race Relations Act 1976 2(1)(a)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – King v Great Britain China Centre CA 1991
The court considered the nature of evidence which will be available to tribunals considering a race discrimination claim.
Held: A complainant must prove his or her case on the balance of probabilities, but it is unusual to find direct evidence . .
Cited – Strathclyde Regional Council v Zafar; Zafar v Glasgow City Council HL 16-Oct-1997
The absence of any other explanation for the unfair dismissal of a black worker, does not of itself and inescapably lead to finding of race bias, or racial discrimination. He had been dismissed following complaints of sexual harassment, later found . .
Cited – O’Donoghue v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council CA 17-May-2001
The Tribunal had been entitled to find on the evidence that an employee unfairly dismissed by reason of sex would have been fairly dismissed for misconduct six months later in any event because of her antagonistic and intransigent attitude. The . .
Leave – Scott v London Borough of Hillingdon CA 3-Apr-2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination
Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167859
