Securicor Security Limited v. M Toujani [2005] UKEAT 0050_05_2004 (20 April 2005)

Securicor Security Limited v. M Toujani [2005] UKEAT 0050_05_2004 (20 April 2005)

The Employment Tribunal failed to distinguish between the evidence required to shift the burden of proof and the evidence required to find discrimination, relying on the same factors for both, which is logically impossible and constitutes an error of law.

Citation
[2005] UKEAT 0050_05_2004
Parties
Appellant: Securicor Security Ltd; Respondent: Mr Toujani
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
20 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, Victimisation, Burden of Proof
Employment Law Discrimination Law Race Discrimination Victimisation 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Securicor Security Ltd

Appellant

Mr Toujani

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the Employment Tribunal correctly apply Section 54(A)(2) of the Race Relations Act 1976 regarding the burden of proof in a victimisation claim?
  2. 2 Did the Tribunal make adequate findings of fact and draw necessary inferences from the evidence?

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal failed to distinguish between the evidence required to shift the burden of proof and the evidence required to find discrimination, relying on the same factors for both, which is logically impossible and constitutes an error of law.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • case remitted for rehearing by a fresh Employment Tribunal