Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

The case of Singh v Glasgow University & Anor demonstrates that allegations of bias in the Employment Tribunal – especially when they relate to race discrimination on the part of the Tribunal – should be approached with extreme caution. Unfounded allegations will result in an extremely irritated Employment Appeal Tribunal and the probability of costs being awarded against the party making the allegation.

The facts in Singh v Glasgow University & Anor

Dr Singh (“the Claimant”) is of English nationality and Sikh religion. He submitted claims to the Employment Tribunal in 2009 against his employer, Glasgow University, and colleagues at Glasgow, including a Professor Gusterson. The Employment Tribunal discharged Professor Gusterson from the proceedings, something to which the Claimant objected. He submitted a notice of appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal alleging, among other things, that the Employment Tribunal was biased against English litigants.

The law relating to bias in the Employment Tribunal

The Employment Tribunal has a duty to act fairly to litigants. An allegation of bias on the Tribunal’s behalf is therefore extremely serious. There are three categories of bias that can be alleged in the Employment Tribunal:

  1. Actual bias
  2. Automatic disqualification
  3. A real possibility of bias

Actual bias is a claim that the litigant has proof that the judge in their case was actually biased against them for some reason. This allegation has an extremely high burden of proof and is almost impossible to demonstrate. If a litigant has doubts as to the partiality of a judge it is therefore better to attempt to demonstrate that there was a real possibility of bias on a judge’s behalf, a claim which has a lower burden of proof.

Automatic disqualification is when the judge is disqualified from adjudicating upon a case because of some general or pecuniary interest that they (or a spouse, partner or family member) possess. The litigant seeking to prove this must first show that the judge has an interest in the case (such as a shareholding in one of the parties). The party must then show that the potential effect of the interest is large enough to be capable of affecting the judge’s decision. If there is doubt as to this then there is a presumption that the judge should be disqualified from the case.

Demonstrating a real possibility of bias is the normal means by which parties seek to demonstrate bias. The party must show:

  1. That circumstances exist which suggest the judge is biased
  2. That those circumstances would lead a fair-minded and informed observe to conclude that there was a real possibility that the tribunal was biased?

The key factor in the above test is to show that there was a public perception of the possibility of unconscious bias. Factors which may demonstrate a perception of unconscious bias include personal friendship or animosity between the judge and any member of the public involved in the case or that the judge was closely acquainted with any member of the public involved in the case (among others).

The Employment Appeal Tribunal’s judgment in Singh v Glasgow University & Anor

The Employment Appeal Tribunal emphatically found against Dr Singh. It found that Dr Singh had not succeeded in showing that there was a real possibility of bias, let alone that there was actual bias displayed by the Tribunal. The EAT went on to state that Dr Singh’s suggestion of anti-English bias was “an unacceptable slur” to the integrity of the Scottish judiciary.

Our specialist employment lawyers’ thoughts on Singh v Glasgow University & Anor

This case shows that allegations of bias in the Employment Tribunal should be approached with caution by parties. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) takes such allegations extremely seriously and it is suggested that, if possible, an alternative ground of appeal should be utilised to avoid irritating the EAT.

About Chris Hadrill

Chris is a specialist employment lawyer at Redmans. He specialises in contentious and non-contentious employment matters, including breach of contract claims, compromise agreements and Employment Tribunal cases. He writes on employment law matters on a variety of websites, including Direct 2 Lawyers, Lawontheweb.co.uk, LegalVoice, the Justice Gap and his own blog. Contact Chris by emailing him at chadrill@redmans.co.uk

Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk

Testimonials

4.68 Average

69 Reviews

Anonymous

The guidance and assistance I recently received when using Redman's was fantastic. Caroline & Chris were both very informative and understanding walking me through each step. Thank you.

Posted 2 days ago

Nicola W

Fantastic service, very quick and efficient. Thank you

Posted 2 days ago

Anonymous

Excellent professional service.

Posted 2 days ago

Anonymous

As with All solicitors advice without consequence but understood and communicated my legal position

Posted 1 week ago

Anonymous

Prompt, professional and excellent service.

Posted 1 week ago

Dominic C

Excellent service, prompt and helpful

Posted 2 weeks ago

Anonymous

I found Redman’s to be very efficient and got me the best deal available in the short time scale that was available.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Victor L

Very professional. Provided excellent advice on my Settlement agreement.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Anonymous

Professional from start to finish.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Oliver W

Excellent service provided by Redmans, will certainly consider using again.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Melanie H

Very professional and extremely personable service. Thank you very much.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

I found Chris to be very approachable and easy to speak with about complex matters. He took action quickly and his updates to me, as his client, were prompt. I would recommend Chris and the team at Redmans without hesitation.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Good advice

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Overall happy with the service provided by Chris and Rana.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Chris and Rana provide a great service, very informed, diligent and care about your result, would recommend Redmans

Posted 1 month ago

David W

A speedy efficient friendly service, I would definitely recommend Redmans Solicitors for processing Settlement Agreements.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Both Rana and Chris were fantastic. From the first phone call I was confident my matter was in good hands. I was not disappointed. I would highly recommend Redmans. Thank you again for all of your support and advice.

Posted 1 month ago

Federico S

Great advices and communication. Through Redmana I obtained match more than what I thought. Highly recommended

Posted 1 month ago

Tom G

A good and efficient service with the required legal advice provided for a settlement agreement.

Posted 1 month ago

Francis T

The solicitor I used was Chris Hadrill, who I found extremely professional and I felt that he made me feel at ease, considering the subject matter he was assisting me with.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Chris provided excellent assistance with the negotiation of my settlement agreement. From start to finish, I was consitently updated and advised on the best course of action to take. I would highly recommend Chris and Redmans Solicitors.

Posted 1 month ago