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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll