Oyarce v Cheshire County Council

Oyarce v Cheshire County Council

Section 54A of the Race Relations Act 1976, as inserted by the 2003 Regulations, does not apply the reverse burden of proof to claims of victimisation. The statutory wording confines the reverse burden to discrimination on grounds of race or ethnic or national origins, which does not include victimisation as defined in section 2. The Directive does not require the reverse burden to apply to victimisation, and principles of Community law do not mandate a broader interpretation.

Parties
Appellant: Ms Lucien Oyarce; Respondent: Cheshire County Council; Intervener: Equality and Human Rights Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Burden of Proof, Victimisation, Statutory Interpretation, Transposition of Directives
Employment Law Anti Discrimination Law European Union Law Burden of Proof Victimisation Statutory Interpretation Transposition of Directives

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 27 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms Lucien Oyarce

Appellant

Cheshire County Council

Respondent

Equality and Human Rights Commission

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does section 54A of the Race Relations Act 1976 apply the reverse burden of proof to claims of victimisation as well as direct and indirect discrimination?
  2. 2 Is the UK required by Directive 2000/43/EC to apply the reverse burden of proof to victimisation claims?
  3. 3 Does the wording of section 54A, as inserted by the Race Relations Act (Amendment) Regulations 2003, cover victimisation claims?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 54A of the Race Relations Act 1976, as inserted by the 2003 Regulations, does not apply the reverse burden of proof to claims of victimisation. The statutory wording confines the reverse burden to discrimination on grounds of race or ethnic or national origins, which does not include victimisation as defined in section 2. The Directive does not require the reverse burden to apply to victimisation, and principles of Community law do not mandate a broader interpretation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; no reference to the European Court of Justice