Yeh its great reading though

I go away for 5 minutes and see what happens.

Na. Maple and I are old Lower Addiscombe boys. All is forgiven.

I still want my examples providing precedent of burden of proof in non-employment discrimination cases.

Don't worry, I just looked it up. Same as employment. Once you have established a very basic prima facie case the burden moves to the defendent. You just have to show that something could be discrimination to kick start the process.

So in this case the bakery had to do most of the hard work.

Edited by Mapletree (11 Oct 2018 6.37pm)

I think a better term would be standard of proof.

The burden of proof shifts in an employment tribunal depending on what you are proving.
For example, the employer has the burden of proof to show a valid reason for dismissal. The employee has the burden of proof that he or she worked for that employer.
In a case of discrimination, as I suggested earlier, it is really about proving that discrimination has taken place. The burden of that proof is not really significant.

Yes, it was a sh*thole, but it was our sh*thole.

Nowadays the Wine Bar seems to be the place to be.