Institute and Faculty of Actuaries v R Davda
The respondent did not subject the claimant to direct discrimination regarding the number of examination opportunities, as the treatment arose from arrangements of other bodies, not the respondent. The employment tribunal erred in its identification of treatment, comparator, and application of the James principle. The indirect discrimination finding was unsafe due to errors in comparator pool and factual premise. The aiding claim under s.112 and the indirect discrimination claim are to be remitted for redetermination. The cross-appeal on the Fellowship requirement fails.
Source excerpt
- Direct discrimination
- Indirect discrimination
- Race discrimination
- Qualification bodies
- Remission
- Comparators