header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
25 September 2008
Issue: 7338 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Good intentions?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

What next for Cardiff Women's Aid? Chris Milsom reports

While discriminatory job advertisements have long been regarded as unlawful, only the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) can bring claims against their authors or publishers; individuals are currently barred from doing so. The justification for this is that an advertisement can only ever constitute an intent to discriminate rather than an act.

It may well have been decided that an advertisement for a “black or Asian woman” information centre worker for Cardiff 's Women's Aid, placed in the Guardian on 19 August 1992, was lawful under s 38 of the Race Relations Act 1976 (RRA 1976). However, the view of the Employment Apppeal Tribunal (EAT) in Cardiff Women's Aid v Hartup [1994] IRLR 390 was that any such lawful defence was “not something for us to decide” (per Judge Levy QC at para 8). Nor did it matter whether Hartup had applied for the job or not: “We do not think that it is necessary to decide on this point in the context of the decision we have

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

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: CPR tweak closes third-party disclosure gap
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
NLJ this week: Court of Appeals wrestles with Mazur fallout
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll