Iteshi v British Telecommunications (Practice and Procedure : Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity) [2011] UKEAT 0378_11_3008 (30 August 2011)

Iteshi v British Telecommunications (Practice and Procedure : Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity) [2011] UKEAT 0378_11_3008 (30 August 2011)

There was no appearance of bias or procedural irregularity by the Employment Tribunal or EAT. The Tribunal's findings that the Claimant was not shortlisted or interviewed for reasons unrelated to race or gender were reasonable and supported by evidence. The Respondent's explanations for recruitment decisions were accepted as genuine. The Claimant failed to establish facts from which discrimination could be inferred, and no error of law or perversity was shown.

Citation
[2011] UKEAT 0378_11_3008
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Mr J Iteshi; Respondent: BT plc
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
30 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Rule 3(10) Application; Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; application for permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, Sex Discrimination, Bias and Recusal, Procedural Irregularity
Employment Law Discrimination Law Race Discrimination Sex Discrimination Bias and Recusal Procedural Irregularity

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr J Iteshi

Appellant/claimant

BT plc

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Rule 3(10) Application; Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal or EAT exhibited bias or procedural irregularity
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant was subject to direct or indirect race or sex discrimination in recruitment
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in its findings of fact or law

Ratio Decidendi

There was no appearance of bias or procedural irregularity by the Employment Tribunal or EAT. The Tribunal's findings that the Claimant was not shortlisted or interviewed for reasons unrelated to race or gender were reasonable and supported by evidence. The Respondent's explanations for recruitment decisions were accepted as genuine. The Claimant failed to establish facts from which discrimination could be inferred, and no error of law or perversity was shown.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; application for permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Application for recusal refused.
  • Appeal dismissed under Rule 3(10).