Key facts of the case - The claimant and his wife, who were both Muslims brought claims against a bakery which had not offered them jobs. The wife argued that she had been discriminated against her headscarf-wearing while the husband claimed race discrimination.
Her claim of race discrimination was dismissed, but her claim of religious discrimination was upheld, the Tribunal concluding that the bakery was either concealing or not admitting the true reason for not offering her a job. The claim of her husband was also rejected on the basis that there was no evidence to show that the claimant’s race was the reason why he was not offered a job.

Main reasoning of the court - The EAT agreed with the submission that the Tribunal had not considered the burden of proof provision in s54A(2). The claimant must have proved facts from which the Tribunal could conclude that he had been treated less favourably on grounds of race, given the conclusions which it reached in respect of his wife’s claim.