Jiad v Byford & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 1224 (16 July 2002)

Jiad v Byford & Ors [2002] EWCA Civ 1224 (16 July 2002)

It is arguable that the Employment Tribunal misdirected itself by requiring a comparator for direct discrimination and failed to scrutinise the reasons for the applicant's treatment. The applicant's claim for race discrimination and victimisation was tenable and should not have been struck out summarily. The costs order lacked sufficient basis.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 1224
Parties
Applicant: JIAD; Respondent: BYFORD and Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal and Extension of Time / Permission to Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted; extension of time allowed.
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, Victimisation, Employment Tribunal Procedure, Costs Orders
Employment Law Discrimination Law Race Discrimination Victimisation Employment Tribunal Procedure Costs Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JIAD

Applicant

BYFORD and Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal and Extension of Time / Permission to Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in striking out the claim for race discrimination and victimisation as having no prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether the award of £3,500 costs against the applicant was justified

Ratio Decidendi

It is arguable that the Employment Tribunal misdirected itself by requiring a comparator for direct discrimination and failed to scrutinise the reasons for the applicant's treatment. The applicant's claim for race discrimination and victimisation was tenable and should not have been struck out summarily. The costs order lacked sufficient basis.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted; extension of time allowed.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted.
  • Extension of time allowed with liberty to BBC to set aside at own risk as to costs.