Justification in discrimination claims

Published by a LexisNexis Employment expert
Practice notes

Justification in discrimination claims

Published by a LexisNexis Employment expert

Practice notes
imgtext

This Practice Note examines what is meant by Justification, sometimes referred to as the ‘justification Defence’, in the context of Discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010).

This Practice Note contains references to case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). For guidance on whether judgments of the Court of Justice are binding on UK courts, see Practice Note: Assimilated law—Assimilated case law

Domestic laws that have been made to implement UK obligations under EU law, such as the obligation to implement a Directive (eg Directive 2000/78/EC, the Equal Treatment Framework Directive) are assimilated law. For further information, see Practice Note: Assimilated law.

A proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim

Unlike direct discrimination (except direct age discrimination—see Age: both direct and indirect discrimination may be justified, below), indirect discrimination can be justified (see Practice Note: Indirect discrimination). The justification defence will be made out if the respondent can show that the provision, criterion or practice (PCP) amounting to indirect discrimination was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

The test can be broken

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Key definition:
Justification definition
What does Justification mean?

A defence used in defamation claims that a defamatory statement is 'substantially' true — the 'sting' of the allegation must be proven, and minor factual errors will not necessarily deprive the defendant of the defence but to be successful, the statement’s factual content must be proven true as well as the interpretation which may be understood of it, and any supporting innuendo.

Popular documents