Ms N Ali v Lincolnshire County Council Heard via Cloud Video Platform — 2021

Ms Ali applied for an RCO2 post at The Beacon, was shortlisted and interviewed on 12 December 2018 by Ms Balchin and Ms Partridge, but was not appointed. She later asked for feedback by email on 14 December 2018 and did not receive a reply. The tribunal treated the case as one of direct discrimination on grounds of race and religion or belief, and noted that the separate allegation about a Silver Medal Scheme was not raised in the claimant's witness statement, cross-examination, or submissions.

The tribunal found that the respondent ran a careful and consistent selection process. The same questions were asked of candidates, the interview notes were contemporaneous, and the successful candidate NW scored 28 compared with the claimant's 22. On the safeguarding question, the tribunal accepted Ms Balchin's evidence that the interviewers were looking for an understanding of escalation to the LADO, and it preferred the respondent's account of the answers recorded in the notes. It also accepted the evidence that the claimant appeared to want night work, whereas the role was a mixed-shift post.

Applying section 13 Equality Act 2010 and the burden of proof authorities it cited, including Shamoon, Igen, Madarassy, Hewage, Bahl, B and C v A, and South Wales Police Authority v Johnson, the tribunal held that the claimant had not proved facts from which discrimination could be inferred. There was no evidence that either interviewer knew her religion, and no evidence that they knew she identified as South Asian descent, although the tribunal accepted she may have been perceived as Asian and, if she wore a headscarf, may have been presumed to be Muslim. The claimant's view that she had relevant experience and had been treated unfairly was not enough to establish discrimination.

In any event, the tribunal held that the respondent had shown the treatment was not because of race or religion. It found that the claimant was not the best candidate on the day and that even if she had scored full marks on the disputed safeguarding question, she still would not have overtaken NW. On the feedback issue, the tribunal accepted that feedback had been given at interview and found that the failure to answer the later email request was an oversight, not a deliberate refusal because of either protected characteristic.