Jiad v. BBC World Service & Ors [2001] UKEAT 1007_99_0506 (5 June 2001)

Jiad v. BBC World Service & Ors [2001] UKEAT 1007_99_0506 (5 June 2001)

The Tribunal was entitled to find that Dr Jiad was not subjected to unlawful race discrimination or victimisation. The comparators relied upon were either not in materially similar circumstances or the differences in treatment were adequately explained by non-discriminatory reasons. The Tribunal's findings on credibility, training, business trips, acting-up, and appraisals were supported by evidence and not perverse. The correct legal principles, including those from Nagarajan v LRT, were substantially applied.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 1007_99_0506
Parties
Appellant: Dr Jiad; Respondent: BBC; Respondent: Mr Muawad; Respondent: Mr G. McLellan
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
05 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, Victimisation, Employment Tribunal Procedure
Employment Law Equality Law Race Discrimination Victimisation Employment Tribunal Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Jiad

Appellant

BBC

Respondent

Mr Muawad

Respondent

Mr G. McLellan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in dismissing claims of race discrimination and victimisation under the Race Relations Act 1976
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal applied the correct legal test for victimisation post-Nagarajan v LRT
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal's findings on comparators, training, business trips, and appraisals were perverse or inadequately reasoned

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled to find that Dr Jiad was not subjected to unlawful race discrimination or victimisation. The comparators relied upon were either not in materially similar circumstances or the differences in treatment were adequately explained by non-discriminatory reasons. The Tribunal's findings on credibility, training, business trips, acting-up, and appraisals were supported by evidence and not perverse. The correct legal principles, including those from Nagarajan v LRT, were substantially applied.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed