Deer v Walford and another EAT/0283/10
Reports relating to this case:
Discrimination questionnaire: No justification for drawing victimisation inferences where replies "transparently genuine"
- 23 November 2011
In Deer v Walford and another EAT/0283/10, the EAT held that replies to a statutory discrimination questionnaire were “transparently genuine” and that there was no justification for drawing inferences of victimisation.
- 4 May 2011
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that the process for deciding what, if any, inferences should be drawn from answers to a statutory discrimination questionnaire is no different from the steps that tribunals should take in any other case where an inference of discriminatory behaviour is sought to be drawn.