header-logo header-logo

15 November 2007 / Nick Hurley , Will Nash
Issue: 7297 / Categories: Features , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

Just not cricket

Reconciliation or sell out? Nick Hurley and Will Nash review the collapse of Darrell Hair’s discrimination claim

The recent collapse of cricket umpire Darrell Hair’s discrimination claim was as surprising as it was well publicised. Umpire Hair’s high profile in the international cricketing world resulted in his tribunal claim receiving broad coverage across the international media. Cricket took a rare centre stage in the world of sport following Hair’s claim that he was discriminated against by the International Cricket Council (ICC) on the grounds of his race and colour.
Hair’s problems started with the forfeited test match between England and Pakistan in August 2006. Pakistan was accused of tampering with the ball by the two umpires officiating the match, Hair and Billy Doctrove, and deducted five runs as a penalty. Pakistan refused to play on. After much confusion, the umpires removed the bails and awarded a win to England. An investigation by the ICC followed and Hair was effectively barred from officiating in main Test matches. Doctrove continued to umpire at the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll