Clarke v. Parkes & Anor [2000] UKEAT 954_99_2505 (25 May 2000)

It is arguable that the Tribunal erred in law by failing to expressly address the comparator argument central to Mr Clarke's racial discrimination claim, warranting a full hearing.

Citation: [2000] UKEAT 954_99_2505
Parties: Appellant: Lambert Clarke; First Respondent: Leroy Parkes; Second Respondent: Securitas UK Ltd
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 25 May 2000
Procedural Posture: Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Outcome: Appeal allowed to proceed to full hearing on the comparator issue.
Legal Topics: Unfair Dismissal, Racial Discrimination, Comparator Analysis

Employment Law Equality Law Unfair Dismissal Racial Discrimination Comparator Analysis

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Lambert Clarke

Appellant

Leroy Parkes

First Respondent

Securitas UK Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Employment Tribunal failed to address the comparator argument central to Mr Clarke's racial discrimination claim
2 Whether the Tribunal's decision complied with the rule in Meek v City of Birmingham

Ratio Decidendi

It is arguable that the Tribunal erred in law by failing to expressly address the comparator argument central to Mr Clarke's racial discrimination claim, warranting a full hearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed to proceed to full hearing on the comparator issue.

Orders

Skeleton arguments to be exchanged 21 days before the full hearing.
Failure to comply may result in adjournment and consideration of wasted costs.