Allison Bailey v Stonewall Equality Limited & Ors

Allison Bailey v Stonewall Equality Limited & Ors

The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in rejecting the claim against Stonewall. The making of the complaint by Stonewall was not an inducement or cause of the discriminatory act by Garden Court Chambers within the meaning of section 111 of the Equality Act 2010. The facts found did not compel a finding that Stonewall was liable, as the complaint was a protest and not intended to induce or cause discrimination, and responsibility for the discriminatory outcome lay with Garden Court Chambers.

Parties
Appellant: Allison Bailey; First Respondent: Stonewall Equality Limited; Second Respondent: Garden Court Chambers Limited; Third Respondent: Rajiv Menon KC and Stephanie Harrison KC (on behalf of all members of Garden Court Chambers)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Religion or Belief Discrimination, Causation and Inducement Under Equality Act, Protected Characteristics, Direct Discrimination, Statutory Interpretation
Employment Law Equality and Discrimination Religion or Belief Discrimination Causation and Inducement Under Equality Act Protected Characteristics Direct Discrimination Statutory Interpretation

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allison Bailey

Appellant

Stonewall Equality Limited

First Respondent

Garden Court Chambers Limited

Second Respondent

Rajiv Menon KC and Stephanie Harrison KC (on behalf of all members of Garden Court Chambers)

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Stonewall Equality Ltd caused or induced Garden Court Chambers to discriminate against Allison Bailey contrary to section 111 of the Equality Act 2010
  2. 2 Interpretation of 'causing' and 'inducing' under section 111 of the Equality Act 2010
  3. 3 Whether the facts as found by the Employment Tribunal compelled a finding of liability against Stonewall

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in rejecting the claim against Stonewall. The making of the complaint by Stonewall was not an inducement or cause of the discriminatory act by Garden Court Chambers within the meaning of section 111 of the Equality Act 2010. The facts found did not compel a finding that Stonewall was liable, as the complaint was a protest and not intended to induce or cause discrimination, and responsibility for the discriminatory outcome lay with Garden Court Chambers.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed