The EAT has confirmed "with some degree of hesitation and disquiet" (para. 38) that the reversed burden of proof in discrimination claims does not apply to allegations of victimisation.
It held that a close examination of s54A of the Race Relations Act 1976 and the Equal Treatment Directive 2000 shows an intention to treat victimisation separately from direct and indirect discrimination. The reversal of the burden of proof, whilst applying to direct and indirect discrimination, does not apply to victimisation.
Oyarce v Cheshire County Council
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment