The Royal Parks Ltd v G Boohene & Ors

The Royal Parks Ltd v G Boohene & Ors

The ET erred in law by defining the PCP and the pool for comparison too narrowly, excluding other outsourced workers and failing to assess the impact of the PCP across all directly and indirectly engaged workers. This incomplete comparative assessment meant the claimants did not make good their case that a PCP had...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: The Royal Parks Ltd; Respondents: G Boohene and 15 others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed; claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Indirect Discrimination, Race Discrimination, Contract Workers, Comparative Assessment, Provision Criterion or Practice (pcp), London Living Wage, Section 19 Equality Act 2010, Section 41 Equality Act 2010
Employment Law Discrimination Law Indirect Discrimination Race Discrimination Contract Workers Comparative Assessment Provision Criterion or Practice (pcp) London Living Wage +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Royal Parks Ltd

Appellant

G Boohene and 15 others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether contract workers employed by a third party can rely on the principal’s own employees as comparators for claims of indirect race discrimination under section 41 Equality Act 2010
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal (ET) erred in its identification of the relevant provision, criterion or practice (PCP) and the appropriate pool for comparison
  3. 3 Whether the respondent applied the relevant PCP to the claimants

Ratio Decidendi

The ET erred in law by defining the PCP and the pool for comparison too narrowly, excluding other outsourced workers and failing to assess the impact of the PCP across all directly and indirectly engaged workers. This incomplete comparative assessment meant the claimants did not make good their case that a PCP had been applied giving rise to group disadvantage. The ET’s judgment was set aside and the claims dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; claims dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment of the Employment Tribunal set aside
  • Claims of indirect race discrimination dismissed