The Employment Equality (Age) Regulations were introduced in England and Wales in 2006, seeking to prohibit age discrimination in employment and vocational training. This thesis assesses whether the legislation adopted is an effective mechanism by which to address age discrimination in the workplace and achieve the dual but contradictory objectives of the European Union Framework Directive on Equal Treatment of achieving equal treatment between age cohorts whilst encouraging the active participation of older citizens in the workplace. The thesis sheds light on this hitherto unregulated suspect ground of discrimination by means of a quantitative and qualitative analysis of all employment tribunal judgments which relate to an age discrimination claim over a three and a half year period. This study shows that very few claimants were successful if their claim of age discrimination was considered by a tribunal and there was considerable inconsistency of implementation and interpretation of the legislation by individual tribunals. Employers have quickly developed defences against claims of age discrimination in order to maintain their freedom to contract and the imbalance between the two parties was particularly noticeable with claimant credibility often under scrutiny – a process claimants appeared unprepared for. Regional discrepancies were found in terms of success rates and compensation awards. A gender award gap was found in both overall compensation and injury to feelings awards, with women given smaller awards than men, whilst younger workers were given smaller awards than older workers. Legal representation made a substantial difference to success rates and compensation awards, but the majority of awards were low and many would not have covered legal costs. The low compensation awards do not provide an effective deterrent, as required by the Article 17 of the Directive. The legislation is particularly ineffective for those who claimed they had suffered multiple discrimination. Although an important first step in regulating ageist behaviour, the Regulations and the subsequent Equality Act 2010 will be unlikely to achieve the aims of the Directive as they provide little incentive for claimants to undertake the stressful process of making a claim under the legislation, which relies upon individual fault-finding.

<p>The focus of this paper is the right of the visually impaired to access tertiary education that is not unfairly discriminative and unequal. The study is intended to highlight the inadequacy in the current legislation on equality such as the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 and the Higher Education Act 101 of 1997 in properly promoting the ideals and purpose of constitution. Furthermore to analyse the constitutional court's approach to equality and non discrimination in order to provide solutions and recommendations for changes to existing legislation that is indeed to be effective.It also aim to define what it means to have equality for the visually impaired, more especially in tertiary education through the constitutional court's definition of equality...</p>

<p>The focus of this paper is the right of the visually impaired to access tertiary education that is not unfairly discriminative and unequal. The study is intended to highlight the inadequacy in the current legislation on equality such as the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 and the Higher Education Act 101 of 1997 in properly promoting the ideals and purpose of constitution. Furthermore to analyse the constitutional court's approach to equality and non discrimination in order to provide solutions and recommendations for changes to existing legislation that is indeed to be effective.It also aim to define what it means to have equality for the visually impaired, more especially in tertiary education through the constitutional court's definition of equality...</p>

Magister Legum - LLM / South Africa

No / The current austerity in government spending has far reaching implications, not only for individuals but for the context in which a welfare state is perceived. The position has been reached at the same time as equality legislation makes some groups more visible. This article is an early attempt at drawing out the relationship between lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people and welfare spending cuts, made observable because of legislation requiring impact assessment. This article draws on research into impact prepared by the author, in affiliation with the Bradford LGBT Strategic Partnership, and considers LGB claims to welfare and to citizenship.