- Cited — Page v Lord Chancellor & Anor 2021-02-26
“…laim for direct discrimination or victimisation”: the locus classicus is the decision of the House of Lords in James v Eastleigh Borough Council [1990] UKHL 6, [1990] 2 AC 751. But the case-law also makes clear that in this context “motivation” may be used in a different sense from…”
- Cited — Page v NHS Trust Development Authority 2021-02-26
“… what “motivates” the putative discriminator they do not include their “motive”, which it has been clear since James v Eastleigh Borough Council [1990] UKHL 6, [1990] 2 AC 751, is an irrelevant consideration: I say a little more about those terms at paras. 69-70 of my judgment in the magistracy appeal, and I need not repeat it here.…”
- Cited — Ali v Capita Customer Management Ltd (Rev 2) 2019-05-24
“…EAT erred in law in concluding on a contingent basis at [68] of its judgment that the Chief Constable’s submission based upon James v Eastleigh Borough Council [1990] 2 AC 751, [1990] ICR 554 was well founded.…”
- Cited — Owen v AMEC Foster Wheeler Energy Ltd & Anor 2019-05-14
“…principle, established in R v Birmingham City Council, Ex p Equal Opportunities Commission [1989] AC 1155 and James v Eastleigh Borough Council [1990] ICR 554; [1990] 2 AC 751, that no hostile or malicious motive is required. James v Eastleigh Borough Council also shows that, even if the protected characteristic is not the overt crit…”
- Cited — Unite the Union v Nailard 2018-05-24
“… blacks admitted’, race is, necessarily, the ground on which (or the reason why) a black person is excluded. James v Eastleigh [James v EastleighBorough Council[1990] 2 AC 751] is a case of this kind. There is a superficial complication, in that the rule which was claimed to be unlawful – namely that pensioners were entitled to free …”