header-logo header-logo

11 January 2007
Issue: 7255 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Discrimination

Williams v Richmond Court (Swansea) Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1719, [2006] All ER (D) 218 (Dec):

The test of whether there was discrimination for the purposes of s 22(3) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA 1995) (discrimination in relation to premises) is a two-stage process:

(i) establishing the reason for the treatment of the disabled person; and
(ii) whether that treatment was less favourable than that which would be accorded to comparators.

Section 24(1), DDA 1995 (meaning of discrimination) requires one to:

(i) identify the treatment of the disabled person that is alleged to constitute discrimination;
(ii) identify the reason for that treatment;
(iii) determine whether the reason relates to the disabled person’s disability; (iv) identify the comparators, namely people to whom the reason does not or would not apply; and
(v) determine whether the treatment of the disabled person is less favourable than the treatment that is or would be
accorded to the comparators.

Issue: 7255 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll