header-logo header-logo

29 January 2009
Issue: 7354 / Categories: Case law , Tribunals , Public , Discrimination , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Discrimination

Ladele v London Borough of Islington [2009] All ER (D) 100 (Jan)

Where a case involves alleged direct discrimination:
(i) the tribunal has to determine the reason why the claimant was treated as he was;

(ii) if the tribunal is satisfied that the prohibited ground is one of the reasons for the treatment, that is sufficient to establish discrimination (it need not be the only or even the main reason; it is sufficient that it is significant in the sense of being more than trivial);

(iii) tribunals frequently have to infer discrimination from all the material facts. The first stage places a burden on the claimant to establish a prima facie case of discrimination; if the claimant proves such facts, the burden shifts to the employer who can only discharge the burden by proving on the balance of probabilities that the treatment was not on the prohibited ground;

(iv) the mere fact that the claimant is treated unreasonably does not justify an inference of unlawful discrimination to satisfy stage one (if the employer shows that

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll