Disability Discrimination

Coleman v Attridge Law and Law – ECJ – 17/7/08

The European Court of Justice has ruled that the Equal Treatment Framework Directive protects employees who are not disabled but endure direct discrimination and/or harassment because they are associated with a disabled person. The Claimant in this case was a carer of a disabled person and felt she had been discriminated against because of that.

London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm – HL 25/6/08

The House of Lords considered the definition of disability related discrimination and found that:

(i)   An employer cannot be liable for discrimination unless it knows, or ought to have known of the disability

 

(ii)   the disability must have played a motivating part in the decision of the alleged discriminator to inflict the treatment complained of

 

(iii)   the correct comparator is a person who does not have the disability but whose circumstances are similar.

Amendments to Sex Discrimination Act 1975

The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 has been amended. The definition of sex harassment has been widened and employers have been made liable in certain circumstances for the harassment of an employee by a third party (e.g. a customer or supplier). The definition of discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy or maternity has also been slightly amended to remove the need for a formal comparator of any kind.

Age Discrimination

Wilkinson v Springwell Engineering Ltd - ET - 25/2/08

The employee was 18 years of age. The Tribunal found the Employer had made stereotypical assumptions founded on age to the detriment of the employee and had assumed a relationship between experience and age and capability. The employee was awarded £5,000 for injury to feelings and loss of earnings up to the date of the hearing and future losses of 26 weeks. In addition the Tribunal also applied an uplift to the compensation on the basis that the employer had failed to follow any procedure before dismissing her.

Race Discrimination

Ladele v London Borough of Islington – ET – 30/05/08

The Employment Tribunal found that a Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages had been discriminated against on the grounds of her religion by requiring her to participate in civil partnership services against her orthodox Christian beliefs – that particular duty could have been allocated to others, without any adverse impact on the Employers services.

Noah v Sarah Desrosiers t/a Wedge – ET- 29/5/08

A hair salon refused to offer a job to a Muslim hairdresser who insisted on wearing a headscarf because it was essential to her beliefs. The hair salon argued it was a requirement of the job for a hair stylist’s own hair to be on show. The Employment Tribunal found this amounted to indirect discrimination on the grounds of religion.