Bruce v Chamberlain & Anor Rev 1 [2004] EWCA Civ 1047 (29 July 2004)

Bruce v Chamberlain & Anor Rev 1 [2004] EWCA Civ 1047 (29 July 2004)

The duty to make reasonable adjustments under sections 5(2) and 6 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 does not arise where the selection criteria for a job are not related to the applicant's disability; therefore, the claim that the employer should have adjusted the criteria to accommodate Mr. Bruce's lack of experience was misconceived and had no reasonable prospect of success.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 1047
Parties
Appellant: Mr V M S Bruce; 1st Respondent: Mr A M J Chamberlain; 2nd Respondent: Addleshaw Goddard & Co
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Reasonable Adjustments, Disability Discrimination Act 1995, Selection Criteria in Recruitment, Victimisation, Doctrine of Precedent

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr V M S Bruce

Appellant

Mr A M J Chamberlain

1st Respondent

Addleshaw Goddard & Co

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal (civil Division)

  1. 1 Whether the employer was under a duty to make reasonable adjustments to selection criteria under sections 5(2) and 6 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995
  2. 2 Whether there must be a causal connection between the disability and the disadvantage caused by selection criteria
  3. 3 Whether the previous EAT decision in Bruce v Cavalier and Thompsons is binding and applicable

Ratio Decidendi

The duty to make reasonable adjustments under sections 5(2) and 6 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 does not arise where the selection criteria for a job are not related to the applicant's disability; therefore, the claim that the employer should have adjusted the criteria to accommodate Mr. Bruce's lack of experience was misconceived and had no reasonable prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal is refused.
  • Permission to appeal to the House of Lords is formally refused.