___________________

Case No: A2/2010/0305
Neutral Citation Number: [2010] EWCA Civ 596
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE PETER CLARK AND MEMBERS)
[UKEAT/0055/09/SM]()

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: Thursday, 20th May 2010

Before:

LORD JUSTICE RIMER

• - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

**BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC (Appellant)

• and -**

ELIZA MAK & ORS (Respondents)

• - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  

(DAR Transcript of
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
165 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2DY
Tel No:  020 7404 1400  Fax No: 020 7831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)

• - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  

Mr Thomas Linden QC (instructed by Messrs Baker McKenzie) appeared on behalf of the Appellant.

THE RESPONDENT DID NOT APPEAR AND WAS NOT REPRESENTED.

• - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  

Judgment (As approved by the court)

Crown Copyright©

**Lord Justice Rimer: 
**1.Sir Richard Buxton has on the papers refused permission to appeal in this case, and he gave short and ostensibly cogent reasons for doing so. My reading of the papers, including the skeleton argument prepared by Mr Linden QC which he has as to certain aspects of it helpfully developed orally this afternoon, has not convinced me that an appeal is likely to succeed.

2.I have, however, an intuitive sense that there is or may be something wrong with the assumption by a domestic employment tribunal of jurisdiction over a claim for racial and age discrimination by claimants such as those in this case whose connection with the jurisdiction can be said to be tenuous. I am, perhaps more importantly, anyway also of the view that the interpretation of section 8(1) and (4) of the Race Relations Act 1976, upon which the applicant's argument centrally turns, is not easy; and the submission which the applicant wishes to make, that this case is a section 8(4) rather than a section 8(1) case, is a serious argument that cannot simply be dismissed out of hand.

3.In the circumstances I consider that the case raises an issue of sufficient difficulty and importance to justify the giving of permission to appeal and I accordingly give such permission.  I will say a day, but if the parties agree that they need more then they may put a revised estimate in, but I will say a day at this stage. The court should include at least one employment law specialist and three Lords Justices.

Order:  Application granted.