Naeem (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Justice (Respondent)

The case of Naeem and another v Secretary of State for Justice involved appeals concerning indirect discrimination on grounds of race and/or religion. The legal issues centered on whether indirect discrimination required proof of the reason for the disadvantage and the appropriate group for comparison. The court held that indirect discrimination did not require establishing the reason for the disadvantage; instead, it required a causal connection between the provision, criterion, or practice (PCP) and the disadvantage suffered by the group and the individual. The disadvantage could be defined as the likelihood of failure or the actual failure, as long as it corresponded between the group and the individual. The court also determined that the comparison group should include all employees affected by the PCP, not just those employed since a certain date. The court allowed the appeal in the Essop case, finding that the Employment Tribunal should determine the claims based on the correct interpretation of indirect discrimination. In the Naeem case, the appeal was dismissed as the Employment Tribunal had not fully explored alternative means of eliminating or reducing the disadvantage. The final orders would be for the Employment Tribunal to reconsider the claims in accordance with the court's judgment.