The Equality Act
The Equality Act
The Secretary of State relies on the Equality Act 2010 ("the Equality Act") in support of her submission that the construction of regulation 64(3) for which the claimant contends would involve impermissible direct discrimination against those students who do not share his religious objections to interest.
I consider the following provisions of that Act to be potentially relevant.
In material part, section 4 provides:
“The protected characteristics
4. The following characteristics are protected characteristics—
…
religion or belief;
…”
and section 10 provides:
“Religion or belief
10. (1) Religion means any religion and a reference to religion includes a reference to a lack of religion.
(2) Belief means any religious or philosophical belief and a reference to belief includes a reference to a lack of belief.
(3) In relation to the protected characteristic of religion or belief—
(a) a reference to a person who has a particular protected characteristic is a reference to a person of a particular religion or belief;
(b) a reference to persons who share a protected characteristic is a reference to persons who are of the same religion or belief.”
Direct discrimination is defined by section 13(1):
“Direct discrimination
13. (1) A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if, because of a protected characteristic, A treats B less favourably than A treats or would treat others.
Section 13(1) of the Equality Act defines direct discrimination but does not, without more, make it unlawful. The various prohibitions against discriminations are contained in Parts 3 to 7.
However, those prohibitions are subject to Schedule 22 to the Equality Act (to which effect is given by section 191). The relevant parts of paragraph 1 of that Schedule read as follows:
Statutory authority
1. (1) A person (P) does not contravene a provision specified in the first column of the table, so far as relating to the protected characteristic specified in the second column in respect of that provision, if P does anything P must do pursuant to a requirement specified in the third column.
Specified provision
Protected characteristic
Requirement
…
Parts 3 to 7
Religion or belief
A requirement of an enactment
…
- Heading
- Section 1
- I set that decision aside and re-make it as follows
- REASONS
- The facts
- The total claimed overpayment was therefore £7,488.40
- Gravesham’s decisions
- The manuscript worksheet dated 23 January 2018 in the supporting papers states that the student finance figures were
- disregarding the Parents’ Learning Allowance (see paragraph 23 above) under regulation 59(4) of the Regulations
- Digression: Gravesham’s letter of 29 November 2017
- The relevant law
- Housing benefit legislation
- who have been assessed, or treated, as incapable of work for 196 days who have been assessed as, or treated as, having, limited capability for work for 196 days
- who are deaf and in respect of certain specified payments have been awarded from public funds
- The European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act
- The Equality Act
- CH/4429/2006
- The Tribunal’s decision
- Permission to appeal and the Secretary of State
- Grounds of Appeal
- The responses
- Hearing
- Discussion
- The interpretation of regulation 64: CH/4429/2006
- deciding whether to accept those terms; and if so completing the form and returning it to the Student Finance Authority
- The interpretation of regulation 64: Gravesham’s submissions
- The interpretation of regulation 64: the Secretary of State’s submissions
- Administrative inconvenience and the floodgates
- Discrimination
- The Upper Tribunal’s decision
- Conclusions
![[2023] UKUT 193 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)