Watt v Ahsan - [2007] UKHL 51

HOUSE OF LORDS

SESSION 2007–08
[2007] UKHL 51

on appeal from:[2005] EWCA Civ 990

OPINIONS

OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL
FOR JUDGMENT IN THE CAUSE

Watt (formerly Carter) (sued on his own on behalf of the other members of the Labour Party) (Respondent) v. Ahsan (Appellant)

Appellate Committee

Lord Hoffmann

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Lord Carswell
Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Counsel

Appellants: Respondents:

Robin Allen QC Gavin Millar QC

Akua Reindorf Michael Ford

(Instructed by Commission for Racial Equality)

(Instructed by Thompsons)

Hearing date:

16, 17 & 18 JULY 2007

ON
WEDNESDAY 21 NOVEMBER 2007

HOUSE OF LORDS
OPINIONS OF THE LORDS OF APPEAL FOR JUDGMENT
IN THE CAUSE

Watt (formerly Carter) (sued on his own on behalf of the other
members of the Labour Party) (Respondent) v Ahsan (Appellant)
[2007] UKHL 51

LORD HOFFMANN
My Lords,
1. Between 1991 and 1998 Mr Raghib Ahsan was a Labour Party councillor for the Sparkhill Ward of Birmingham. The ward has a large Pakistani population and he is from Pakistan. When the 1998 local government elections were approaching, he hoped to be readopted as the Labour candidate. Ordinarily, the candidate would have been chosen by the Sparkhill branch of the party. But when the selection process was due to take place, late in 1997, the Sparkhill branch had been suspended for nearly three years. The reason was that, early in 1995, articles had appeared in the Observer and the Daily Mail in which it was alleged that local councillors of Pakistani origin or associated with the Pakistani community were helping Pakistani residents to jump the queue for housing grants. The journalists made free with words like “sleaze” and “scandal”. One of the councillors named in this connection was Mr Ahsan, who was known to be an aspirant for adoption as prospective parliamentary candidate for the Sparkbrook constitutency, which included the Sparkhill ward. The newspapers linked the housing grant story to another story that large numbers of Pakistanis, real or imaginary, had suddenly joined the Birmingham Labour party. The implication was that Mr Ahsan was recruiting or inventing countrymen to support his parliamentary ambitions.
2. The reaction of the Labour Party national executive was immediately to suspend four constituency parties and their branches, including Sparkhill. These were mainly the wards with the highest concentration of ethnic minority groups. In the event, after inquiry by the party, no evidence was found of any impropriety in connection with housing grants on the part of Mr Ahsan or the other Pakistani councillors. They appear to have been doing no more than advising or encouraging their constituents to exercise their statutory rights. The executive’s concerns about new members were addressed by requiring all members to attend in person at the Labour Party office to verify their membership. Again, no evidence of any abuse involving Mr Ahsan was found. Nevertheless eight branches remained suspended throughout the 1997 general election campaign and they remained suspended when it came to the selection of candidates…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Watt v Ahsan

Details

AGLC: Watt v Ahsan [2007] UKHL 51
Case: [2007] UKHL 51
Decision Date: 21 November 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Watt v Ahsan, heard in the House of Lords, involved Mr Raghib Ahsan, a former Labour Party councillor, who alleged racial discrimination by the party during the selection of candidates for the 1998 local government elections. The Labour Party argued that it was not subject to the provisions of the Race Relations Act 1976, which made it unlawful to discriminate in the terms of conferring authorisations or qualifications. The central issue before the court was whether the Labour Party qualified as a body that could confer such authorisations or qualifications, thereby falling under the jurisdiction of employment tribunals.

The House of Lords determined that the Labour Party did not qualify as a body conferring authorisations or qualifications within the meaning of the Act. Instead, the court found that the Labour Party's candidate selection process was based on popularity and electoral prospects rather than objective standards. Consequently, any racial discrimination in candidate selection should have been addressed under a different section of the Act, specifically section 25, which prohibits racial discrimination by associations.

Furthermore, the court ruled that a prior employment tribunal decision, which had determined that the Labour Party was a qualifying body, was binding on the parties due to the principle of issue estoppel. This meant that Mr Ahsan's complaints of racial discrimination and victimisation, as found by the tribunal, stood affirmed. The House of Lords reinstated the tribunal's decision, finding that the Labour Party had indeed discriminated against Mr Ahsan on racial grounds during the candidate selection process.

Orders