header-logo header-logo

Casting aspersions

13 February 2015 / Catherine Urquhart
Issue: 7640 / Categories: Features , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail
urquhart

Catherine Urquhart reports on a new frontier in discrimination law

There has recently been extensive discussion of whether discrimination on the basis of one’s caste may be prohibited by s 9(1) of the Equality Act 2010, which bans discrimination on the grounds of race.

On 19 December 2014 Mr Justice Langstaff handed down his judgment in the first Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) case to consider caste-based discrimination, Chandhok v Tirkey UKEAT/0190/14/KN, [2015] All ER (D) 91 (Jan).

Ms Tirkey had alleged that her employers, Mr and Mrs Chandhok, had discriminated against her in part due to her low status in the caste system. At a preliminary hearing, Employment Judge Sigsworth had refused to strike out the amendment claiming caste-based discrimination, and the respondents appealed.

Section 9(1) of the Equality Act 2010 defines “race” as including: (a) colour; (b) nationality; (c) ethnic or national origins. There is currently no reference to caste in this sub-section.

Langstaff P considered Mandla v Dowell Lee [1983] 2 AC 548, [1983] 1 All ER 1062 (the case which

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll