Marks & Spencer Plc v Martins [1996] UKEAT 745_95_2603 (26 March 1996)

Marks & Spencer Plc v Martins [1996] UKEAT 745_95_2603 (26 March 1996)

The majority held that Marks & Spencer had established the statutory defence under Section 32(3) of the Race Relations Act 1976 by taking reasonably practicable steps to prevent discrimination, and that the Tribunal's findings of bias and racial motivation were inadequately reasoned and perverse. The appeal was allowed and the complaint dismissed.

Citation
[1996] UKEAT 745_95_2603
Parties
Appellant: Marks & Spencer Plc; Respondent: Miss Adelle Martins
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
26 March 1996
Procedural Posture
Employment Discrimination Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; complaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Racial Discrimination, Victimisation, Vicarious Liability, Equal Opportunities, Burden of Proof
Employment Law Equality Law Racial Discrimination Victimisation Vicarious Liability Equal Opportunities Burden of Proof

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

Parties

Marks & Spencer Plc

Appellant

Miss Adelle Martins

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Discrimination Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Marks & Spencer Plc discriminated against Miss Martins on racial grounds in refusing her employment
  2. 2 Whether the Industrial Tribunal erred in law in its findings of bias and racial discrimination
  3. 3 Whether Marks & Spencer established a defence under Section 32(3) of the Race Relations Act 1976

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that Marks & Spencer had established the statutory defence under Section 32(3) of the Race Relations Act 1976 by taking reasonably practicable steps to prevent discrimination, and that the Tribunal's findings of bias and racial motivation were inadequately reasoned and perverse. The appeal was allowed and the complaint dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; complaint dismissed

Orders

  • Decision of the Industrial Tribunal quashed
  • Complaint of racial discrimination dismissed