A claimant who brought a groundbreaking caste discrimination case has been awarded £183,774 for unlawful deductions from wages, with further compensation to come for race discrimination.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has suggested that the victimisation provisions in the Equality Act 2010 extend to claims of discrimination by association.
The Court of Appeal has held that it is necessary in indirect discrimination claims for the claimant to show why the provision, criterion or practice (PCP) has disadvantaged the group and the individual claimant.
In Chandok and another v Tirkey [2015] IRLR 195 EAT, the EAT held that discrimination on the ground of caste is capable of falling within the meaning of race discrimination in s.9(1) of the Equality Act 2010.
Carly Mather is a managing associate, Gerri Hurst and Lucy Sorrell are associates, Mona Jackson is a trainee solicitor and Richard Branson is a paralegal at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
Helen Almond is professional support lawyer, Nigel Cousin and Victoria Davies managing associates and Iain Naylor and Andrew Nealey associates Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
In DLA Piper's latest case report, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) upheld an employment tribunal decision to recuse itself after the employment judge disclosed to the parties that she had received information from the police part-way through the tribunal hearing. The EAT went on to give guidance as to the procedure that tribunals should follow when information from third parties is provided during the hearing.
The Supreme Court has held that the connection between an employee's immigration offences and the statutory civil wrong of discrimination is insufficiently close to prevent her from making a claim for pre-dismissal racial harassment.