|
FL Memo Ltd © 2008 |
|
Employment Memo 2008 Newsletter Issue 2 |
|
PDF printer friendly version |
|
RECENT CASES |
|
Equality at work Discrimination - religion or belief
¶¶5383, 5826 The Administrative Court has reviewed the decision of a school not to allow a devout Sikh girl to wear a narrow bangle known as a Kara. Having had the benefit of expert evidence on its significance, it found that while it was not strictly a compulsory requirement of Sikhism, she wore the bangle believing, on reasonable grounds, that it was an important symbol of her religious and racial identity. In the circumstances, preventing her from doing so amounted to a detriment and indirect discrimination on the ground of both race and religion.
R (on the application of Watkins-Singh) v Governing Body of Aberdare Girls' High School [2008] EWHC 1865, Admin Discrimination - another's religion or belief
¶¶5384, 5435 The EAT has held that where an employer subjected an employee to detrimental treatment in an attempt to pressure him to support attempts to remove another employee on the ground of the second employee's religion, it amounted to unlawful discrimination. Here, the employer called the claimant to a number of investigatory meetings without proper explanation of what was going on, required him to produce files at short notice and kept him in a state of uncertainty as part of a campaign to dismiss his supervisor on the grounds of his Hindu faith. The employer's conduct was found to be unfavourable treatment on the grounds of religion.
Saini v All Saints Haque Centre and ors [2008] EAT case 0227/08 Disability discrimination - those associated with a disabled person
¶5451 The ECJ has given its judgment in this case, which was a referral from a tribunal on the question of whether the EC Directive dealing with disability discrimination protects non-disabled people who suffer discrimination because of their association with a disabled person. The case was brought by a former legal secretary who suffered discrimination by her employers because she took time off to care for her disabled son. The ECJ ruled that the Directive does protect her on the ground that it deals with discrimination on specific grounds, including disability, not discrimination against specific types of people. The case will now be considered again by an employment tribunal, which will decide whether the Disability Discrimination Act can be read to give effect to the terms of the Directive without further legislation being needed. The case will also be taken into consideration in the drafting of the forthcoming Equality Bill (see updates to Employment Memo ¶5252).
Coleman v Attridge Law [2008] ECJ Case-303/06
Comment The Directive under consideration also covers sexual orientation, age, and religion or belief, and the relevant legislation is likely to need amendment to provide cover for those who suffer discrimination by association on these grounds.
|
