header-logo header-logo

25 June 2009 / Emma Williamson
Issue: 7375 / Categories: Features , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

The trouble with Malcolm

Emma Williamson says disability discrimination cases must be treated on their own merits

In June 2008 a well-established understanding of disability-related discrimination was thrown into disarray by the House of Lords in Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm [2008] UKHL 43, [2008] All ER (D) 342 (Jun). This case made it considerably more difficult for claimants to succeed in disability-related discrimination claims.

The Equality Bill purports to address Malcolm, by replacing disability-related discrimination with provisions regarding (i) indirect discrimination; and (ii) discrimination arising from disability. Concept (i) was considered inappropriate in relation to disability discrimination when the legislation on this was introduced in 1995 (Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA 1995)) and revised in 2005 (DDA 2005). It is not clear how previous concerns regarding its suitability in this context have been addressed. Concept (ii) is entirely new. It is not clear how courts will interpret this (and given the somewhat surprising decision in Malcolm, few are likely to place bets).

Perhaps clarifying the original legislation and confirming our original pre-Malcolm understanding of disability-related discrimination would have been

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll