Briefings Index (by article)

1. Volume: 60 Briefing: 813 Date: 2017 Author Rachel Crasnow QC
   How scared should we be? Discrimination law and Brexit - a long gaze into the crystal ball Go direct to Briefing
2. Volume: 59 Briefing: 812 Date: 2016 Author Eirwen-Jane Pierrot
   XC v CD and ASLEF EAT overturns ET decision that a requirement that employees work weekends was not justified and therefore indirectly discriminated against women. The ET had failed to properly consider the employers legitimate aim of meeting the demands of its service, Go direct to Briefing
3. Volume: 59 Briefing: 811 Date: 2016 Author Daniel Zona
   Risby v London Borough of Waltham Forest EAT overturns ET decision that there must be a direct causal link between disability and the 'something arising' in a s15 EA claim. It confirms that disability need only be an effective cause of the unfavourable treatment. Go direct to Briefing
4. Volume: 59 Briefing: 810 Date: 2016 Author Catherine Rayner
   Smith v Gartner UK Ltd EAT upholds ETs decision that employer did not discriminate on grounds of age where the income replacement insurance scheme it provided ceased payments of benefits at age 60. The cause of the different treatment was the terms of the insurance contract, Go direct to Briefing
5. Volume: 59 Briefing: 809 Date: 2016 Author Heather Williams QC
   Pendleton v Derbyshire County Council and The Governing Body of Glebe Junior School EAT finds that a Christian teacher dismissed for standing by her husband after his conviction for making indecent images of children suffered indirect discrimination because of her religious belief in the sanctity of marriage. The claimant and those Go direct to Briefing
6. Volume: 59 Briefing: 808 Date: 2016 Author Robert Maddox
   Geller v Yeshurun Hebrew Congregation EAT finds that ET had erred in failing to consider whether an employer had subconsciously discriminated against the appellant. The ETs conclusion that the respondents witnesses held a genuine belief that they had not discriminated was too subjective. As Go direct to Briefing
7. Volume: 59 Briefing: 807 Date: 2016 Author Peter McTigue
   AA Solicitors Limited and Ali v Majid EAT considers the approach to calculating an award for injury to feelings and decides Judicial College Guidelines for personal injury are not relevant to claims of this nature. ETs can adjust the Vento bands to take account of the effect of inflation. Go direct to Briefing
8. Volume: 59 Briefing: 806 Date: 2016 Author Michael Reed
   G4S Cash Solutions (UK) Ltd v Powell EAT upholds ET's decision that the employers ongoing duty to make reasonable adjustments required it to maintain the claimants previous salary. Go direct to Briefing
9. Volume: 59 Briefing: 805 Date: 2016 Author Michael Newman
   R v (on the application of Hunter) v Student Awards Agency for Scotland and others Court of Session upholds Article 14 age discrimination complaint in relation to the right to education, and a breach of the PSED when student refused loan for living expenses because she exceeded the age limit set by the regulations. Go direct to Briefing
10. Volume: 59 Briefing: 804 Date: 2016 Author Sally Robertson
    Galo v Bombardier Aerospace NICA overturns ITs decision to reject disabled claimants discrimination complaints because the tribunal had not met the requirements of procedural fairness. It is the tribunals duty to consider the need to make reasonable adjustments in order to ensure Go direct to Briefing
11. Volume: 59 Briefing: 803 Date: 2016 Author Naomi Cunningham
    Blackwood v Birmingham & Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust CA overturns ET and EAT decision that the ET lacked jurisdiction to hear a complaint about discrimination in the course of a work placement on the grounds that it was a part 6 EA claim only justiciable in the county court. The provision preventing Go direct to Briefing
12. Volume: 59 Briefing: 802 Date: 2016 Author Michael Potter
    European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland CJEU rejects European Commission challenge to the UKs requirement that economically inactive EU nationals must be ordinarily resident to qualify for social security benefits. Regulation No 883/2004 does not preclude national legislation applying a Go direct to Briefing
13. Volume: 59 Briefing: 801 Date: 2016 Author Catherine Rayner
    Action urged on workplace pregnancy and maternity discrimination Go direct to Briefing
14. Volume: 59 Briefing: 800 Date: 2016 Author Razia Karim
    Discrimination and financial services: the role of Financial Ombudsman Service Go direct to Briefing
15. Volume: 59 Briefing: 799 Date: 2016 Author Lena Mohamed
    Fears mount over detrimental Prevent strategy Go direct to Briefing
16. Volume: 58 Briefing: 798 Date: 2016 Authors Henrietta Hill QC Louise Price
    Moorthy v HMRC N Upper Tribunal confirms that a termination payment which includes an element related to discrimination and injury of feelings will be taxable under s401 ITEPA where the discrimination arises from the termination itself; injury to feelings awards are not Go direct to Briefing
17. Volume: 58 Briefing: 797 Date: 2016 Author Daniel Zona
    Wasteney v East London NHS Foundation Trust N EAT affirms ET decision that it is not an act of harassment or discrimination to discipline staff for inappropriate manifestation of their religion or belief. The ET also concluded that senior staff must have regard to their influential position when Go direct to Briefing
18. Volume: 58 Briefing: 796 Date: 2016 Author Sally Robertson
    Banaszczyk v Booker Limited N EAT upholds ET decision that an incorporated body is entitled to bring EA claim of direct discrimination where it suffers detrimental treatment because of the protected characteristic of someone with whom the company is associated. Go direct to Briefing
19. Volume: 58 Briefing: 795 Date: 2016 Author Rosalee Dorfman
    Gallop v Newport City Council EAT holds that a single decision-maker alleged to have discriminated against an employee must have actual or constructive knowledge of his/her disability; imputed knowledge is insufficient. Go direct to Briefing
20. Volume: 58 Briefing: 794 Date: 2016 Author Peter Nicolson
    Harron v Dorset Police UKEAT/0234/15/DA EAT considers the approach taken by the ET in deciding that the claimants belief in the proper and efficient use of public money in the public sector did not amount to a philosophical belief under s10 EA and remits the claim for reconsideration. Go direct to Briefing
21. Volume: 58 Briefing: 793 Date: 2016 Author Michael Potter
    Mulvena and Smith v SS for Communities and Local Government, EHRC intervening CA holds that following a successful test case which established that the SOSs recovery of planning appeals was discriminatory and unlawful, a refusal to extend time to enable similar claims to be pursued did not breach the EU right to an effective remedy Go direct to Briefing
22. Volume: 58 Briefing: 792 Date: 2016 Author Catrin Lewis
    R (Rights of Women) v Secretary of State for Justice CA holds that regulation 33 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations frustrated the statutory purpose of LASPO 2012. It prescribed the types of supporting evidence of domestic violence for an application for legal aid too rigidly and narrowly, Go direct to Briefing
23. Volume: 58 Briefing: 791 Date: 2016 Author Louise Price
    Michalak v General Medical Council and Ors CA overturns EAT decision that a discrimination complaint against a qualification body, as defined by s53 EA, could not be brought before the ET. This decision overturned Jooste v GMC. The EAT had wrongly concluded that the ETs jurisdiction was ousted as Go direct to Briefing
24. Volume: 58 Briefing: 790 Date: 2016 Author Heather Williams QC
    Secretary of State for Justice v Windle & Arada CA holds that an absence of mutuality of obligations between a series of short-term contractual engagements is relevant to whether the claimants met the extended EA definition of employment. Go direct to Briefing
25. Volume: 58 Briefing: 789 Date: 2016 Author Eirwen-Jane Pierrot
    Hottak v FCO CA confirms that employees working abroad must satisfy the same test of territorial jurisdiction as established in Lawson v Serco in order to bring discrimination claims under the EA. Go direct to Briefing