header-logo header-logo

Employment Law

03 January 2008 / Peter Hungerford-welch
Issue: 7302 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment , In Court
printer mail-detail

Environment Agency v Rowan  [2008] IRLR 20, [2007] All ER (D) 22 (Nov)

 

An employment tribunal considering a claim that an employer has discriminated against an employee pursuant to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, s 3A(2) by failing to comply with the s 4A duty must identify:

 

(i) the provision, criterion or practice applied by or on behalf of an employer, or

(ii) the physical feature of premises occupied by the employer,

(iii) the identity of non-disabled com­parators (where appropriate), and

(iv) the nature and extent of the substantial disadvantage suffered by the claimant.

 

It should be borne in mind that identification of the substantial disadvantage suf­fered by the claimant may involve a consideration of the cumulative effect of both the “provision, criterion or practice applied by or on behalf of an employer” and the “physical feature of premises”, so it is necessary to look at the overall picture. Un­less the employment tribunal has identified these four matters, it cannot go on to judge if any pro­posed adjustment is reasonable.

 

Issue: 7302 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment , In Court
printer mail-details

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