disparate (adverse) impact claim failed because this type of philosophy involves the plaintiff proving that the employment practice was more severely on one set of individuals than another‚ and the practice is not justified by business necessity. A prima face case is recognized when: (1) the plaintiff perceives a certain employment practice to be tested; and (2) through appropriate statistical investigation and revealing that the test practice has an adverse impact on a certain group. Mr. Dunlap did
Premium Discrimination Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Racism
Tilte and citation …………………………………………………………………………….3 Ratio decidendi ………………………………………………………………………………3 Facts of the case (in brief ) ……………………………………………………………………4 Issues:- allegations by one party …………………………………………………………….5 allegations denied by other party……………………………………………………5 Relevant Sections and Definitions………………………………………………………………5 Obiter dicta……………………………………………………………………………………...10 Decision of the court……………………………………………………………………………..10 Tilte and citation In decision
Premium Prima facie Magistrate Pleading
The relevance of Bureau worth of smuggled items of Customs seizes Php50 Million. This news is related to Section 2609 and Section 2611 of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines that are subjected to the Disposition of Contraband and Treatment of Dangerous Explosives wherefore‚contraband items that are seized by the Bureau of Customs shall be disposed of in accordance to law. It shall be subject to further investigation for the purpose of knowing if such contraband items are unfit for use
Premium 3rd millennium Prima facie International trade
Issue 1. Did ABC advertising discriminate against Jean on the basis of sex when they failed to promote her? 2. Did ABC discriminate against Jean because of her religious beliefs and practices? 3. Did ABC discriminate against Jean because of her national origin? Brief Answers 1. Ms.Riyadh has not proved enough evidence to conclude that ABC discriminated against her because of her sex. 2. Yes‚ Ms. Riyadh has some strong evidence that a reasonable jury might conclude that
Premium Discrimination Employment Evidence
of Hampton v. Snead State Community College (SSCC)‚ the one element that Hampton failed to establish of a prima facie case of racial discrimination was the forth element in the case. The forth element in the case stated‚ “SSCC treated similarly situated employees outside of Hampton’s protected class more favorably” (Hampton). According to the court‚ Hampton failed to establish the prima facie case of bring substantial evidence of employees of another race who were tried fairly. The plaintiff brought
Premium Prima facie Arbitration Legal burden of proof
JD suggests that we might consider the liberal model of work as a middle ground between the hedonistic interpretation of the convention model and human fulfillment model. Hedonistic interpretation focuses on the happiness and aims at getting whatever one wants. And it claims that individuals are free to choose their own preferences and the goal of economic activity is to satisfy preferences. That is the common point between liberal model and hedonistic interpretation. And the fulfillment school believes
Premium Happiness Individualism Employment
discrimination. In this Title VII discrimination case Ms. Riyadh will have to establish a Prima Facie Case proving religious and gender or sex discrimination. The company (ABC) will have the burden of proof of proving their failure to promote Ms. Riyadh to a higher position is not related to her religion or her sex. Ms. Riyadh has to prove she was intentionally discriminated against due to said reasons. Ms. Riyadh’s Prima Facie will be based on both sex and religious discrimination. Her religious discrimination
Premium Employment Discrimination Sexual harassment
Disparate treatment means unequal behavior toward someone because of a protected characteristic‚ and it is protected under Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act. A disparate treatment violation occurs when an individual of a protected group is shown to have been singled out and treated less favorably than others in a similar situation on the basis of a characteristic that is protected under Title VII. For a disparate treatment claim to be upheld in court it must be plausible and shows that the employer
Premium Evidence Racism Discrimination
Lecture 14 Tort Re Ipsa Loquitur & Defence to Negligence res ipsa loquitur- the facts speak for themselves It means that the plaintiff can prima facie establish negligence where the facts are so obvious that somebody must be negligent otherwise the accident would not have happen. In the common law of negligence‚ the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (Latin: the thing speaks for itself) states that the elements of duty of care and breach can be sometimes inferred from the very
Premium Tort law Tort Duty of care
TVA’s interview process had been manipulated to exclude African-American candidates in general‚ the court of appeals disagreed‚ citing the lack of statistical proof demonstrating that a protected group was adversely affected thus establishing a “prima facie” case. Mr. Dunlap couldn’t prove his claim by only challenging the process used in his own interview‚ thus
Premium Racism Appeal Prima facie