Burden of proof

Case 5: The facts

Ms Oyarce claimed she had been victimised by Cheshire County Council contrary to section two of the Race Relations Act 1976 (RRA). The employment tribunal upheld her claim, applying the reverse burden of proof under section 54.

This meant that once Ms Oyarce had proved facts from which a tribunal could conclude, in the absence of an explanation from her employer, that the employer had victimised her, the burden of proof passed to the council to prove it did not do so.

The ruling

The Court of Appeal said that section 54 and the reverse burden of proof do not apply to cases of victimisation under the RRA 1976, even though it applies to victimisation claims under all other UK legislation. The wording of section 54A does not allow such an interpretation. Nor does the Directive on Race and Equal Treatment 2000/43, which section 54 was intended to implement.