header-logo header-logo

21 July 2023
Issue: 8034 / Categories: Legal News , Employment , Discrimination , Human rights , Tribunals
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Human-rights-first approach marks significant development in employment claims

131243
A recent employment appeal concerning a teacher dismissed for expressing gender-critical views on Facebook is a significant development in employment law because the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) focused on the ‘reason why’ question. In this week’s NLJ, Charles Pigott, professional support lawyer, Mills & Reeve, explains why the EAT’s approach ‘marks a significant development’ for discrimination claims, breaking new ground.

Pigott writes: ‘Perhaps because there was no parallel claim for indirect discrimination, this is believed to be the first EAT decision where a human rights analysis has provided the starting point for the analysis of the “reason why” question under s 13 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), which provides the statutory definition of direct discrimination.’

In its judgment, the Employment Appeal Tribunal offered guidance to help employment tribunals approach the proportionality assessment in this and future cases. 

Read Pigott's assessment in full here.

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