Hampson v Department of Education and Science (House of Lords)

In brief

The House of Lords established the test for objective justification of indirect discrimination. The discriminatory condition, criterion or practice must be justifiable 'irrespective of the colour, race, nationality or ethnic or national origins' of the person to whom it is applied. This requires a proportionality exercise: the tribunal must weigh the discriminatory effect against the reasonable need for the measure. The test is now reflected in EA 2010 s.19(2)(d) ('proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim'). Hampson remains the foundational HL statement of the standard.

Key provisions

• objective-justification-test — Objective-justification test for indirect discrimination (now EA 2010 s.19(2)(d)): The discriminatory PCP must be justifiable 'irrespective of the [protected characteristic]'. Tribunal weighs discriminatory effect against reasonable need. Now codified as 'proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim' in EA 2010 s.19(2)(d). Hampson is the foundational HL statement of this standard.

When relevant

Cite when: (a) indirect discrimination is in issue and the respondent advances an objective-justification defence; (b) need foundational authority for the proportionality test in equality law; (c) respondent claims operational necessity, cost, or administrative efficiency — Hampson is the framework against which such claims must be tested; (d) tracing the proportionality lineage Hampson → Bank Mellat → Akerman-Livingstone; (e) services-side indirect discrimination claims (SPA-2026 fn 75 anchor).