header-logo header-logo

Inquisitors, adversaries & workplace disputes

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

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