header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
22 June 2012 / Michael Salter , Chris Bryden
Issue: 7519 / Categories: Features , Tribunals , Discrimination , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Employment
printer mail-detail

An unsatisfactory state of affairs?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Michael Salter & Chris Bryden tackle contributions between co-respondents

The remedy that most claimants seek from an employment tribunal when complaining about any form of discrimination is financial recompense and a tribunal can award successful claimants compensation for lost earnings and for injury to feelings caused by the acts of discrimination.

In many claims, there are potentially a number of respondents who may be named as parties to the claim. Tribunals are entitled to make joint and several awards against multiple respondents, as they are required to award compensation in the same way as in claims in tort: Way v Crouch [2005] ICR 1362, under what are now s 119 and s 124(6) of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). In Way the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) then proceeded to explain the principles to which tribunals should have regard when considering whether or not to make such an award. The EAT found that it could have regard to the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (CLIA 1978) and

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026—the winners!
The winners of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2026 have now been announced, marking another outstanding celebration of excellence, innovation, and impact across the legal profession
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll