Liability of equality act
It may also be appropriate, depending on the event, to give specific guidance to employees prior to attendance — or at least refer them to the code of conduct.
Employees may be personally liable.
Discrimination claims against individuals
It is important to note that the authorisation does not need to extend to the commission of the discriminatory act in question for liability to arise. So if you instruct a member of staff to discriminate against a student on grounds of their sex then the member of staff can make a claim to an Employment Tribunal and the student can make a claim to a county or sheriff court. Wales As an employer you are legally responsible for acts of discrimination, harassment and victimisation carried out by your employees in the course of employment or by people who take action for you agents. While no such reform is currently proposed, this is a potentially important issue, as expanding the discrimination protection to cover relationships such as those between Mr Kemeh, Ms Ausher and the MoD would significantly increase the risk of liability for end-users. If there have been 2 instances of harassment, of which the employer is aware and they have done nothing to prevent, a third instance which is ignored by the employer will be seen as a breach of the Act. For Example: A lecturer racially discriminates against a student. There is a defence for an employee who reasonably relies on a statement by the employer that doing the thing is not a contravention of the Equality Act s. Legal provisions on 'instructing', 'causing', 'inducing', or 'aiding' can also make other people liable. The managing partner does not issue any direct instruction but suggests to the head of administration that to do this would reflect poorly on his judgement and so affect his future with the firm.
With regard to job applicants, employers must not discriminate or harass By the arrangements they make for deciding who should be offered employment i. The college is able to show that it took all reasonable steps to prevent the harassment and therefore was not liable.
Wales As an employer you are legally responsible for acts of discrimination, harassment and victimisation carried out by your employees in the course of employment or by people who take action for you agents. In the circumstances, Ms Ausher was held not to be an agent of the MoD.
The same applies to acts of an agent done with the authority of the company. Paragraph 9.
Equality act consequences
However, if you can show that you took all reasonable steps to prevent your employees or agents from acting unlawfully, you will not be held legally responsible. While commercial considerations will generally be prioritised, businesses may wish to consider structuring commercial relationships in such a manner that avoids an agency relationship. About Peter Finding. Of course, putting policies in place will not be a panacea. This is likely to amount to causing or attempting to cause the head of administration to act unlawfully. This appears to be based on the fact that Ms Ausher was not authorised by the MoD to act on its behalf, the basic agency test. But there is an exception to this. It may also be appropriate, depending on the event, to give specific guidance to employees prior to attendance — or at least refer them to the code of conduct.
Both the person who receives the instruction and the intended victim will have a claim against whoever gave the instructions. Either B or C can claim if subjected to a detriment. Liability for employees A company or other organisation or person is liable for an act of their employee done in the course of the person's employment.
The employer has a defence in respect of actions of an employee if the employer shows it took all reasonable steps to prevent the employee doing that thing, or doing anything of that description s.
based on 65 review