Race discrimination meaning

In this issue: Horizon scanning Status and worker categories Cross-border, international and jurisdictional issues Benefits Prohibited conduct (discrimination etc) TUPE and asset purchases Bribery, modern slavery, tax evasion and fraud Employment Tribunals Immigration IRLR Highlights—January 2025 Dates for your diary Trackers New Q&As Employment resources on Lexis+® Daily and weekly news alerts Employment Highlights 2024/2025 Horizon scanning Employment Law—looking back at 2024 and ahead to 2025: The Lexis+® Employment team provide a concise overview of the standout employment law changes across 2024 and signpost what to watch in 2025, including movement on the Employment Rights Bill, the forthcoming employer duty to prevent sexual harassment, the Equality (Race and Disability) Bill, plus other impending legislation and significant cases. See News Analysis: Employment Law—looking back at 2024 and ahead to 2025. Status and worker categories MoD loses application to rehear army reservists pension bias case: In Milroy v...

In this issue: Public procurement Children's social care Social care Planning Healthcare Education Governance Local government finance Social housing Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q&A Public procurement Procurement Act 2023 coming into force postponed until February 2025 Parliament has published a written ministerial statement from Georgia Gould, Parliamentary Secretary in the Cabinet Office, proposing a brief deferral to the start date of the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023), previously expected to begin in October 2024. She confirmed the government will lay regulations to move commencement to 24 February 2025. She observed the former administration’s National Procurement Policy Statement (NPPS) fell short of realising the full potential of public procurement, and a fresh NPPS is being drafted to articulate the new Labour government’s priorities. The extra time is intended to support a more seamless transition into the new framework. Ministers in the Welsh Government and the Northern...

In this issue: Employment Rights Act 2025 Pensions Protected characteristics Prohibited conduct Maternity, parents and carers Redundancy Employment Tribunals Dates for your diary Trackers Employment resources on Lexis+® LexTalk®Employment: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Employment Law—looking back at 2025 and ahead to 2026 The Lexis+® Employment team have assembled a round-up of the standout employment law developments across 2025, alongside a preview of priorities for 2026, including anticipated movement on the Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA 2025), the Equality (Race and Disability) Bill, plus forthcoming legislation and notable cases. It also flags themes to watch and highlights items expected to shape practice in the year ahead. See News Analysis: Employment Law—looking back at 2025 and ahead to 2026. Employment Rights Act 2025—what is changing, and when? The Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA 2025) secured Royal Assent on 18 December 2025 and was released—initially as a pdf only—on...

This Practice Note outlines the available resources concerning safeguards and liabilities arising from acts or failures to act that constitute sexual orientation discrimination, or other forms of prohibited conduct linked to sexual orientation. The detail here is intentionally limited, as the principal aim is to point subscribers towards comprehensive materials contained in additional Practice Notes that explore each element in depth. Consequently, treat this Practice Note as an entry point for research; full coverage is provided only in the places signposted below. Its role is to point you forward, not to replace the comprehensive Practice Notes that address each strand of the topic at length, and the links below are where complete information is intended to be consulted and used. The characteristics protected The Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) affords protection against discrimination and other prohibited conduct connected to particular listed characteristics a person may have. Some protections apply solely to one such characteristic. Others operate uniformly across all of them, which together are described as ‘the protected...

An employer may choose to set a dress policy for several reasons, including: presenting a polished, professional look that reflects the organisation’s brand; requiring a uniform; and/or complying with health and safety obligations Employers have considerable freedom in framing a dress policy, but in reality that latitude is tempered by: the need to apply comparable standards to all staff and to base them on a genuine business need, to minimise the risk of successful discrimination claims; and broader employee relations considerations, since the employer will want a policy that is broadly acceptable to most employees This Practice Note examines: relevant statutory and non-statutory guidance on dress codes the discrimination risks and practical considerations that can arise in relation to a dress code specific aspects of attire an employer may wish to include in a dress policy how to implement and enforce a dress code This Practice...

This Practice Note explores which provisions of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) bring into force the prohibitions on discrimination in schools, the various forms of discrimination—sex, race, religion or belief, age, marriage or civil partnership, and disability—and any relevant exceptions that may apply. It further explains that the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties and Public Authorities) Regulations 2017, SI 2017/353, oblige education-function public authorities to publish yearly information showing compliance with the public sector equality duty (PSED) in EqA 2010, s 149... The public sector equality duty Under the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties and Public Authorities) Regulations 2017, SI 2017/353, specific obligations apply to public authorities with education responsibilities. Those bodies must publish material evidencing adherence to the PSED under EqA 2010, s 149, at annual intervals. This must be done every year. See Practice Notes: Specific public sector equality duties—England and Specific public sector equality duties—Wales...

1 Policy statement The Company is committed to advancing equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI). By this we mean: equality: delivering fair treatment and equal opportunity for all employees, workers and job applicants, and eradicating unlawful discrimination; diversity: acknowledging, respecting and valuing the differences in our people’s protected characteristics, backgrounds, skills and experience, and encouraging gender, age and ethnic diversity, alongside diverse physical ability and neurodiversity across our workforce; inclusion: creating a fair, safe workplace for everyone that values difference and enables each person to be themselves, reach their potential and thrive at work. The Company will not unlawfully discriminate against any employee, worker or job applicant on the basis of any protected characteristic recognised by current legislation, namely: age; disability; gender reassignment; marriage or civil partnership status; pregnancy and maternity; race (including colour, nationality and ethnic or national origin); religion or belief; sex; or sexual orientation...

[ Insert in para 8.2 of claim form ET1: ] The Claimant is of [ Indian ] heritage and holds a degree in civil engineering from the [ insert name of college or university ] in India. The Respondent is a practice of engineers conducting business at the premises in [ insert address ]...

Insert in para 6.1 of response form ET3: The Respondent accepts that, when assessing candidates for the English teacher post at their school, they applied a requirement that every applicant must speak and write English clearly and accurately to an acceptable standard for the role in question. The Respondent denies that this requirement placed individuals of the same [ enter details, eg race/ethnic/national origins ] as the Claimant [ specify ] at a particular disadvantage compared with others, though it is accepted that the Claimant personally was put at that disadvantage. In any case, the Respondent maintains that applying this requirement was a proportionate means of pursuing a legitimate aim, namely ensuring that pupils at the school received a good and effective education from teachers who were properly and fully competent to teach them well. Accordingly, it is denied that the Respondent indirectly discriminated against the Claimant because of his [ enter details, eg race/ethnic/national origins ]. It is denied that the Claimant...