D’Silva v. NATFHE (Now Known As University and College Union) & Ors [2008] UKEAT 0384_07_1203 (12 March 2008)

D’Silva v. NATFHE (Now Known As University and College Union) & Ors [2008] UKEAT 0384_07_1203 (12 March 2008)

The Tribunal was entitled to find that the union's refusal/withdrawal of legal assistance was based on the Appellant's lack of trust in the legal team and the merits of his case, not on race or protected acts. No primary facts supported an inference of discrimination or victimisation, and the Tribunal's reasoning and handling of comparators, disclosure, and monitoring were legally sound.

Citation
[2008] UKEAT 0384_07_1203
Parties
Appellant: Dr D'Silva; Respondents: University and College Union (formerly NATFHE) and various officers/employees (Second to Sixth Respondents)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
12 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision Dismissing Claims of Race Discrimination and Victimisation
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, Victimisation, Burden of Proof, Legal Assistance Schemes, Comparators in Discrimination, Disclosure and Inferences, Statutory Questionnaires
Employment Law Discrimination Law Race Discrimination Victimisation Burden of Proof Legal Assistance Schemes Comparators in Discrimination Disclosure and Inferences +1 more

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr D'Silva

Appellant

University and College Union (formerly NATFHE) and various officers/employees (Second to Sixth Respondents)

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision Dismissing Claims of Race Discrimination and Victimisation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in dismissing claims of direct race discrimination and victimisation by the union in refusing/withdrawing legal assistance
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to address key factual allegations, construct proper comparators, or draw inferences from alleged disclosure failures

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to find that the union's refusal/withdrawal of legal assistance was based on the Appellant's lack of trust in the legal team and the merits of his case, not on race or protected acts. No primary facts supported an inference of discrimination or victimisation, and the Tribunal's reasoning and handling of comparators, disclosure, and monitoring were legally sound.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed