Essop and others v Home Office Posted In: Case Law
Case ReferenceUKSC 27
Legal BodyUK Supreme Court / House of Lords (UKSC/UKHL)
Type of Claim / JurisdictionDiscrimination and Equality, Pay and Conditions of Employment
These two appeals were heard together because they both raised issues arising from claims of indirect discrimination. Mr Essop, one of a group of 49 people, was required to pass a Core Skills Assessment (CSA) as a pre-requisite to promotion to certain civil service grades.
A 2010 report established that Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) candidates, as well as older candidates, had lower pass rates than white and younger candidates yet it could not be identified why this was so. The appellants argued that the requirement to pass the CSA amounted to indirect discrimination on the grounds of race
Already a subscriber?
Click here to login and access the full article.Log in now to read the full article
Don't miss out, start your free trial today!
Are you fully aware of the benefits of Legal-Island's Employment Law Update Service? We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact on your business.
Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
Ensure your organisation’s policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from Maxine Orr, Partner at Worthingtons Solicitors
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal-Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.