At the Tribunal | |
Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE PROPHET
MS S R CORBY
MR G LEWIS
APPELLANT | |
RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
Revised
For the Appellant | MR A ROSS (Of Counsel) Instructed by: Messrs Rowley Ashworth Solicitors 247 The Broadway Wimbledon London SW19 1SE |
For the Respondent | MR DAVID READE (Of Counsel) Instructed by: Redrow Group Services Ltd Redrow House St David's Park Flintshire CH5 3RX |
JUDGE PROPHET
"It is always necessary for an applicant to establish that the employer has treated the applicant less favourably than he treats or would treat others to whom that reason does not or would not apply.
"Thus even if there were disability specific harassing remarks by third parties that does not establish a discriminatory act on the part of the employer."
Consequently contrary to the observations in De Vere, upon the different definition under the RRA discrimination, under the DDA discrimination can only be found on the part of an employer under S.5(1) if "for a reason which relates to the disabled person's disability, he treats him less favourably than he treats or would treat others to whom that reason does not or would not apply."
Even then if the circumstances of harassing remarks by third parties was sufficiently under the control of the Respondent that it could, by the application of good employment practice, have prevented the harassment or reduced the extent of it the Respondent will still not have discriminated against the Applicant unless the failure to apply those good employment practices was for a reason which relates to the disabled person's disability and in doing so it treated the Applicant less favourably the Respondent treated or would treat others to whom that reason does not apply."