Employment Appeal Tribunal
The tribunal failed to apply the two-stage process as laid down in the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 s.63A in seeking to determine whether an employee's allegations against his employer amounted to sex discrimination. When the correct test was applied to the evidence before the tribunal it was clear that the employee had made out his case of sex discrimination.
The appellant employee (R) appealed against the part of a decision of the employment tribunal dismissing his claim of unlawful sex discrimination against the respondent employer (H). R alleged that he had been physically and verbally abused during the course of his apprenticeship with H. H denied the bulk of the allegations, but admitted giving R a clip around the ear and verbally insulting him on one occasion. R claimed that H would not have treated a female apprentice in the same way. H admitted that he would not treat a woman as R alleged he had been treated. His case remained however that he did not treat R as alleged in any event save for the clip around the ear which he said he would have delivered to any apprentice, male or female, in the particular circumstances. The tribunal considered the matter on the basis of a hypothetical female apprentice in similar circumstances and held that R had to show a prima facie case that the treatment was on the grounds of R's sex. The tribunal found that H had mistreated R not because he was a man but rather because of H's bad temper and lack of self-control.
LTL 2/11/2005 (Unreported elsewhere)
BURDEN OF PROOF, COMPARATORS, SEX DISCRIMINATION.
The ‘capable, efficient, and helpful’ clerks’ room provides ‘a service-orientated approach and goes above and beyond in trying to ensure you have the right barrister for the job ; you have the utmost confidence in the clerking.”
‘an extremely approachable set of chambers which puts a premium on service delivery.’
Old Square Chambers is delighted to announce that is has again been ranked as a top band set in the…
Old Square’s Nadia Motraghi is acting for the BMA in its judicial review of these controversial Regulations which impose a…View More