header-logo header-logo

08 October 2021 / Alec Samuels
Issue: 7951 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Employment
printer mail-detail

Inquisitors, adversaries & workplace disputes

60018
Alec Samuels asks whether an inquisitorial employment disputes system might be more fair
  • Suggests moving to an inquisitorial rather than adversarial system for employment disputes, in light of Royal Mail v Efobi, a race discrimination case where a postal worker was turned down for more than 20 IT/management jobs despite having suitable qualifications.

The employee, Mr Efobi, worked for Royal Mail and applied for promotion within the company on several occasions. Usually he was rejected without interview; occasionally he was rejected following interview. So far as could be seen he was at least equal in qualification, experience and performance to the successful candidates.

The employee claimed race discrimination. He was black, whereas the other candidates were white. The application form asked about ethnicity; or anyway the employer very probably would have known of the ethnicity of the candidates. He contended it was more than coincidence, and was obviously race discrimination. He proved the above facts, the bare facts. He invited the tribunal to draw an adverse inference. The tribunal

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

Sidley—James Inness

Sidley—James Inness

Partner joins capital markets team in London office

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Firm announces appointment of partner as UK general counsel

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Firm appoints first chief marketing officer to drive growth strategy

NEWS
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
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’

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

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
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
back-to-top-scroll