Victimisation
Tuesday, 19 October 2021 12:13
VICTIMISATION IS SIMILAR TO BEING IN CONTEMPT OF COURT - CANNOT INTERFERE WITH JUSTICE
Equality Act 2010, Section 27
- A person (A) victimises another person (B) if A subjects B to a detriment because
○ B does a protected act or
○ A believes that B has done or may do a protected act
Protected acts (s.27(2))
- Bringing proceedings under this Act
- Giving evidence or information in connection with proceedings under this Act
- Doing any other thing for the purposes of or in connection with this Act
- Making an allegation (whether or not express) that A or another person has contravened this
Act
○ "All that is required is that the allegation relied on should have asserted facts capable of
amounting in law to an act of discrimination…" - Waters v Commissioner of Police of the
Metropolis [1997] ICR 1073 (CA) 1097 (Waite LJ)
Section 27(3)
- Giving false evidence or information, or making a false allegation, is not a protected act if the
evidence or information is given, or the allegation is made, in bad faith
Where the allegation is false but not in bad faith - Martin v Devonshire Solicitors [2011] ICR 352 (EAT)
- A worker at the solicitors made repeated hostile allegations of discrimination against other
workers
- All of the allegations were false but they were not made in bad faith because the cause of the
allegations was the claimant's mental illness
- The claimant was eventually dismissed and sued for victimisation
- The EAT rejected her claim by saying that she wasn’t dismissed because of the protected act,
she was dismissed because of the manner that the allegations were made
'Subjects to a detriment'
- Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [2003] ICR 337 (HL) [35]
○ "Is the treatment of such a kind that a reasonable worker would or might take the view
that in all the circumstances it was to his detriment? An unjustified sense of grievance
cannot amount to 'detriment'… but … it is not necessary to demonstrate some physical
or economic consequence."
○ This illustrates that it does not just have to be physical or financial, it can be a detriment
to feelings
- Chief Constable of West Yorkshire v Khan [2001] UKHL 48 (HL)
○ Sergeant Khan, an employee of the police, brought a claim of racial discrimination
○ He applied for a job at another police force - they asked for a job reference
○ West Yorkshire Police refused to supply a reference - they did this because of legal
advice they had received
○ Because there was already a discrimination trial pending, supplying a reference could
influence a defence, so the reference would be withheld until after the trial - acted
'honestly and reasonably'
○ The reference would have been negative, so the question was whether the refusal to
supply that reference a detriment to Sergeant Khan - HOL said yes
○ EA 2010 s.119(4) - 'damages available for injury to feelings'
'Because'
- Aziz v Trinity Street Taxis [1989] QB 463
Equality Law Page 1
Tuesday, 19 October 2021 12:13
VICTIMISATION IS SIMILAR TO BEING IN CONTEMPT OF COURT - CANNOT INTERFERE WITH JUSTICE
Equality Act 2010, Section 27
- A person (A) victimises another person (B) if A subjects B to a detriment because
○ B does a protected act or
○ A believes that B has done or may do a protected act
Protected acts (s.27(2))
- Bringing proceedings under this Act
- Giving evidence or information in connection with proceedings under this Act
- Doing any other thing for the purposes of or in connection with this Act
- Making an allegation (whether or not express) that A or another person has contravened this
Act
○ "All that is required is that the allegation relied on should have asserted facts capable of
amounting in law to an act of discrimination…" - Waters v Commissioner of Police of the
Metropolis [1997] ICR 1073 (CA) 1097 (Waite LJ)
Section 27(3)
- Giving false evidence or information, or making a false allegation, is not a protected act if the
evidence or information is given, or the allegation is made, in bad faith
Where the allegation is false but not in bad faith - Martin v Devonshire Solicitors [2011] ICR 352 (EAT)
- A worker at the solicitors made repeated hostile allegations of discrimination against other
workers
- All of the allegations were false but they were not made in bad faith because the cause of the
allegations was the claimant's mental illness
- The claimant was eventually dismissed and sued for victimisation
- The EAT rejected her claim by saying that she wasn’t dismissed because of the protected act,
she was dismissed because of the manner that the allegations were made
'Subjects to a detriment'
- Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [2003] ICR 337 (HL) [35]
○ "Is the treatment of such a kind that a reasonable worker would or might take the view
that in all the circumstances it was to his detriment? An unjustified sense of grievance
cannot amount to 'detriment'… but … it is not necessary to demonstrate some physical
or economic consequence."
○ This illustrates that it does not just have to be physical or financial, it can be a detriment
to feelings
- Chief Constable of West Yorkshire v Khan [2001] UKHL 48 (HL)
○ Sergeant Khan, an employee of the police, brought a claim of racial discrimination
○ He applied for a job at another police force - they asked for a job reference
○ West Yorkshire Police refused to supply a reference - they did this because of legal
advice they had received
○ Because there was already a discrimination trial pending, supplying a reference could
influence a defence, so the reference would be withheld until after the trial - acted
'honestly and reasonably'
○ The reference would have been negative, so the question was whether the refusal to
supply that reference a detriment to Sergeant Khan - HOL said yes
○ EA 2010 s.119(4) - 'damages available for injury to feelings'
'Because'
- Aziz v Trinity Street Taxis [1989] QB 463
Equality Law Page 1
