In Jayeola v Commissioners for HMRC, J is of Nigerian ethnic origin and describes his skin colour as black. J and an employee of a contractor G4S were passing through an area where the lights were off for maintenance reasons. The G4S employee said to J that if it had not been for J’s white shirt, he would not have seen him. J lodged a racial discrimination complaint with the employer. The employer did not carry out its own investigation, was unaware of the outcome of G4S’s investigation and the reason for allowing the G4S employee to return to work. The employer refused J’s request to remove the G4S employee from their premises or to ensure that he no longer worked on the same floor as J. An ET found that J had been subjected to direct race discrimination. The employer would have treated a white employee, who made the same request in the same or broadly similar circumstances differently, i.e. it would have granted the white employee’s request that the G4S employee be barred from the premises or the same floor. The ET awarded J £24,646, which included £15,000.00 for injury to feelings.

The updates are kindly provided by Simons Muirhead & Burton Law firm

This update provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and help judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links to access full details. If no link is provided, contact us for more information.  Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, SM&B cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.