Stenning v Jarman & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 399 (15 March, 2001)

Stenning v Jarman & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 399 (15 March, 2001)

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by failing to properly address the notional comparator exercise and by not adequately considering the reasons for differential treatment between the claimant and white employees, as well as failing to evaluate the respondent's explanation and draw appropriate inferences. The Employment Appeal Tribunal was correct to remit the matter for rehearing.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 399
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Letitia Stenning; Respondent/applicant: Nicholas Jarman; Respondent/applicant: London Borough of Hackney
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, Employment References, Burden of Proof in Discrimination Cases, Comparators in Discrimination Claims
Employment Law Discrimination Law Race Discrimination Employment References Burden of Proof in Discrimination Cases Comparators in Discrimination Claims

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Letitia Stenning

Appellant/respondent

Nicholas Jarman

Respondent/applicant

London Borough of Hackney

Respondent/applicant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in its approach to the notional comparator in a race discrimination claim
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal properly evaluated the explanation for differential treatment and drew appropriate inferences

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by failing to properly address the notional comparator exercise and by not adequately considering the reasons for differential treatment between the claimant and white employees, as well as failing to evaluate the respondent's explanation and draw appropriate inferences. The Employment Appeal Tribunal was correct to remit the matter for rehearing.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Matter to be remitted to the Employment Tribunal, differently constituted, for rehearing as previously ordered by the Employment Appeal Tribunal