The claimant had worked for the respondent for 18 months when a claim of rape was made against him (unrelated to work). He had already been suspended for another matter and remained so until dismissed. He brought claims in the ET arguing that he had suffered direct discrimination as the respondent's policy of suspending employees accused of rape discriminated as it could not be used against women. The ET decided that argument had no reasonable prospect of success at a preliminary hearing and struck out the claim.

The President had allowed this appeal to proceed on a narrowed ground namely the judge applied the wrong test when striking out the indirect discrimination claim,as it was arguable the ET had not addressed the heart of the claimant's case which was he had suffered indirect discrimination in relation to the decision that he should be dismissed instead of being redeployed. Mathew Gullick KC sitting as a deputy high court judge allowed the appeal on broadly on that basis and remitted it back to the ET.