This area is visible only to accessibility readers
Skip to page content |
Skip to sub menu |
Skip to breadcrumbs |
Skip to main navigation menu |
Skip to site search |
Skip to footer
|
Rickerbys logo - click here will take you to the homepage
Read more
 Skip Navigation LinksHome  >  Services & Sectors  >  Services  >  Employment  >  Employment Commentaries  >  Employment Commentary - 5/4/2010

Employment Commentary - 5/4/2010

Burden of Proof in Victimisation Cases


In the case of Pothecary Witham Weld v Bullimore, the Appeal Tribunals confirmed that the burden of proof under the Sex Discrimination Act when looking at a victimisation case is reversed and it is effectively for the employer to prove that no victimisation took place. This is contrary to the position in the Race Relations Act where victimisation claims under this Act do not have a reversed burden of proof. (Underlining the need for some consolidation later this year in the Equality Bill.)

In the case at point the employer gave a reference to an employee four years after they had brought discrimination proceedings against it. The reference was unfavourable. The employee claimed that the unfavourable reference was as a result of the employee discrimination claim and therefore the unfavourable reference was victimisation. The employer could not show that the reference was not victimisation and therefore, with the reversed burden of proof, the employer was found to be guilty.





|