O'Connor v Bar Standards Board [2014] EWHC 4324 (QB) (18 December 2014)

O'Connor v Bar Standards Board [2014] EWHC 4324 (QB) (18 December 2014)

The particulars of claim adequately pleaded a case of indirect discrimination under Article 14 ECHR in relation to the BSB's decision to bring disciplinary proceedings, supported by statistical evidence of disproportionate impact on BME barristers. The Master's decision to strike out the Article 14 claim was wrong. However, the Article 6 claims and broader discrimination claims were correctly dismissed as they had no real prospect of success, were not sufficiently pleaded, or were time-barred. Summary judgment and striking out were appropriate for those claims.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 4324
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Daphne Evadney Portia O'Connor; Defendant/respondent: Bar Standards Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Judgment on Appeal From Order Striking Out Statements of Case and Dismissing Action
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Article 14 claim reinstated; Article 6 and other claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
Article 6 ECHR (right to Fair Trial), Article 14 ECHR (prohibition of Discrimination), Indirect Discrimination, Limitation Periods, Summary Judgment, Striking Out Pleadings
Human Rights Law Discrimination Law Professional Discipline Article 6 ECHR (right to Fair Trial) Article 14 ECHR (prohibition of Discrimination) Indirect Discrimination Limitation Periods Summary Judgment +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daphne Evadney Portia O'Connor

Claimant/appellant

Bar Standards Board

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Judgment on Appeal From Order Striking Out Statements of Case and Dismissing Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Bar Standards Board's disciplinary proceedings against the appellant breached her rights under Article 6 and Article 14 ECHR as incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998
  2. 2 Whether the claim was time-barred under the Human Rights Act 1998 s.7
  3. 3 Whether the particulars of claim disclosed a viable case of indirect discrimination under Article 14 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The particulars of claim adequately pleaded a case of indirect discrimination under Article 14 ECHR in relation to the BSB's decision to bring disciplinary proceedings, supported by statistical evidence of disproportionate impact on BME barristers. The Master's decision to strike out the Article 14 claim was wrong. However, the Article 6 claims and broader discrimination claims were correctly dismissed as they had no real prospect of success, were not sufficiently pleaded, or were time-barred. Summary judgment and striking out were appropriate for those claims.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Article 14 claim reinstated; Article 6 and other claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Master's order striking out Article 14 claim set aside to the extent indicated; Article 14 claim may proceed to trial.
  • Article 6 claims and other discrimination claims remain struck out.