header-logo header-logo

01 January 2009 / Ulele Burnham
Issue: 7350+7351 / Categories: Features , Discrimination , Human rights , Employment
printer mail-detail

Promoting equality

Ulele Burnham examines how courts interpret positive equality obligations in public law

In R (Kaur and Shah) v LB Ealing [2008] EWHC 2062 (Admin) Judicial Review proceedings were brought by two clients of Southall Black Sisters (SBS), a well-established specialist service directed at providing support and assistance for victims of domestic violence from predominantly black and asian minority communities, against Ealing Borough Council (Ealing).

Funding
The Ealing decision subject to challenge was a decision to withdraw funding from SBS on the grounds that SBS’s focus on black and minority women was at odds with its perceived obligation to sponsor a borough wide service for all irrespective of race. Ealing relied in particular on the notion that a borough wide service which did not target or cater to specific sectors/groups was an important building block
in community “cohesion”. The claimants complained that Ealing had failed, in breach of its race equality duty contained in s 71 of the Race Relations Act 1976 (RRA 1976), to conduct a proper race equality impact assessment before deciding to

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

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

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
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll