The Claimant, who was of Asian origin, had been offered a posting in Italy, conditional upon his passing an assessment relating to his psychological resilience. In carrying out that assessment, the interviewer had pursued a number of questions relating to the Claimant's ability to cope with racism in Italy. The Respondent reported that the Claimant did not demonstrate the required level of resilience and the risk that he might suffer stress due to discrimination was one of the factors cited. On the basis of this assessment - including the discrimination factor - the Respondent withdrew the offer of the posting. The Claimant won his claim of race discrimination at the ET, the ET finding that both the assessment and the decision to withdraw the offer were inherently discriminatory, the Claimant's race being the criterion for the treatment of which he was complaining. In the circumstances, it concluded that both the assessment and the withdrawal of the posting were acts of unlawful race discrimination. The Respondent appealed.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. The ET had been entitled to find that the Claimant's race was a reason (it did not need to be the only reason) for the less favourable treatment of which he complained. The assessment and then the decision to withdraw the offer of the posting in Italy were explicitly based on a factor - the Claimant being of Asian origin - which was necessarily discriminatory. But for his race, there would have been no concern of his suffering discrimination.