header-logo header-logo

Close—but close enough?

240526

Anjali Malik & Mukhtiar Singh consider the comparator question in discrimination claims

  • The Employment Appeal Tribunal in Jones and Ladbrokes set out a six-stage test for direct discrimination claims, emphasising the need to identify the relevant treatment before considering comparators.
  • Other recent cases show that tribunals increasingly investigate wider circumstances to identify evidential comparators.
  • Employers should expect scrutiny beyond named comparators, and maintain detailed factual records to demonstrate material differences.

Comparators have always been an essential element of direct discrimination claims, yet the approach to comparators continues to provide fertile grounds for appeal—and 2025 yielded a substantial crop of appeal decisions.

June decisions

Readers may recall that in Jones v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2024] EWCA Civ 1568, the Court of Appeal determined that the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), in upholding the employment tribunal’s (ET’s) decision that the claim was out of time, had erred by considering the claimant’s (C’s) suspicion of the necessary facts to establish discrimination as a relevant

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll