Employment tribunals must follow clear guidelines
This report relates to 4 case(s)
-
expand
Ayub and others v Derby City Council ET
(1 other report)
-
- Date:
- 1 March 2001
A local authority which engineered a recruitment exercise in order to ensure an "appropriate" community mix by the appointment of an Indian candidate rather than a Pakistani candidate unlawfully discriminated on grounds of race, holds a Nottingham employment tribunal (Chair: G R Little) in Ayub and other v Derby City Council.
-
expand
Fasuyi v Greenwich London Borough Council [2000] All ER (D) 2013 EAT
(2 other reports)
-
- Date:
- 15 March 2001
In Fasuyi v London Borough of Greenwich, the EAT holds that a tribunal does not invariably make an error of law if, having s.56(1)(c) of the Race Relations Act 1976 ("the RRA") in mind, it does not make a recommendation under that subsection because none is sought by the applicant.
-
- Date:
- 1 March 2001
The EAT in Fasuyi v London Borough of Greenwich has set out some principles in respect of a tribunal recommendation for action to be taken pursuant to s.56(1)(c) of the Race Relations Act 1976 (and the parallel provisions in the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and Disability Discrimination Act 1995).
-
expand
Reid v North West Ceilings Ltd (t/a Shopspec) [2001] All ER (D) 02 (Apr) EAT
(1 other report)
-
- Date:
- 15 June 2001
In Reid v North West Ceilings Ltd t/a Shopspec, the EAT holds that a shopfitter/joiner, with supervisory responsibilities, fell into the now well-recognised category of employees on the "lump", despite the fact that both he and his employer had treated him as self-employed for tax and NI purposes.
-
expand
Rossiter v Pendragon plc [2001] IRLR 256 EAT
(1 other report)
The EAT finds a tribunal's decision 'perverse' in failing to follow established
guidelines when determining a plaintiff's employment status. Plus cases on TUPE, race discrimination and
victimisation.
View the full article today
Register to read this article
Already an XpertHR user?
Log in