In this well-publicised race discrimination case, a job applicant engineered a tribunal claim by submitting two applications for a job with Virgin Atlantic: the first using his real African name and stating that he is a black African; the second using a fake British-sounding name and stating his ethnicity as white British.
In London Borough of Hackney v Sivanandan and others  IRLR 408 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an employer vicariously liable for an employee's discriminatory act had joint and several liability for the whole sum awarded in compensation.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that the Equality Act 2010 can be interpreted to cover post-employment victimisation, disagreeing with the EAT decision in Rowstock and another v Jessemey and another.
In this race discrimination case, the employment tribunal said that it could not interpret the Equality Act 2010 to cover caste discrimination when the claimant and alleged perpetrators are at different levels of the same caste.
David Malamatenios is a partner and Colin Makin, Sandra Martins, Melissa Powys- Rodrigues and Linda Quinn are associates at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.
The Court of Appeal has upheld a decision by the Employment Appeal Tribunal that, where there are multiple respondents and particular loss cannot be attributed to one party, employment tribunals must award compensation on a joint and several liability basis, meaning that the claimant can claim the entire amount from any respondent.
Georgina Kyriacou and David Malamentenios are partners and Melissa Powys-Rogrigues, Sandra Martins, Colin Makin and Krishna Santra are associates at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.
This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, covers the burden of proof in discrimination cases.
In Hounga v Allen and another  IRLR 685 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an employee's illegal conduct that "formed a material part of her dismissal discrimination case" barred her from proceeding with the claim.
This pre-hearing review highlights a drafting error in the Equality Act 2010 that means that post-employment victimisation is not covered. The decision that the claimant's post-employment victimisation claim should be allowed to proceed contrasts with the first-instance decision in Jessemey v Rowstock Ltd and another ET/2700838/11 and ET/2701156/11, in which the employment tribunal rejected the same sort of claim.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to race discrimination.