Background Facts Decision http://www.freeths.co.uk/publications/employment-review-july-14), the EAT held that when determining whether direct discrimination has occurred, the tribunal should focus on the state of mind of Mr Davison, the person solely responsible for taking the decision to dismiss, and that there was no room for imputed knowledge in this context.
When deciding whether or not there has been discrimination by a sole decision maker, a Tribunal is not concerned with the motivation, intention and knowledge of others being imputed to the decision maker, but with the actual motivation, intention and knowledge of that decision maker. In the instant case, the Tribunal was entitled to conclude that because Mr Davison had no actual knowledge of the Claimant’s disability and there was no evidence that his decision to dismiss was because of an intention or motivation stemming from the Claimant’s disability, discrimination on that ground was not a consideration
Comment
The content of this page is a summary of the law in force at the date of publication and is not exhaustive, nor does it contain definitive advice. Specialist legal advice should be sought in relation to any queries that may arise.