header-logo header-logo

07 May 2009 / Helena Davies , Naomi Feinstein
Issue: 7368 / Categories: Features , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

An uncertain prognosis

The new concept of indirect disability discrimination is set to cause confusion, say Naomi Feinstein & Helena Davies

The government's recent announcement that it intends to extend the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 (DDA 2005) to incorporate, for the first time, the concept of indirect discrimination, has caused considerable controversy. The concern is that this would make DDA 2005 even more difficult to work with than it is at present.

Currently, DDA 2005 is constructed in a very different way to the other discrimination strands. There are three types of discrimination:

      
      ●     Direct discrimination.

      
      ●     Disability-related discrimination: where the individual has been treated less favourably than other people to whom that disability-related reason does not apply. Disability-related discrimination can be justified if the reason for the treatment is “material and substantial”. It is generally acknowledged that this is not a particularly onerous test.

      
      ●     Failure to comply with a duty to make reasonable adjustments.

Problems caused by Malcolm

The House of Lords' judgment last year in

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

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

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