Exclusions and Exceptions

  • Laurence Lustgarten


Few enactments cover a particular field comprehensively. In response to the pressure of interest groups, belief that legal intervention is impractical or inappropriate in certain circumstances, a decision that certain manifestations of the problem addressed are of little importance, or sometimes simply due to draftsman’s error, certain categories of people or activity are generally exempted. Yet however reasonable the case for a particular exception may seem, the cumulative effect of reasonable arguments may be that the net becomes a sieve. One respect in which the present Act is a marked improvement on its predecessor is that its employment provisions are subject to many fewer restrictions of scope and application. None the less some exceptions, considered in this chapter, remain.


Racial Group Racial Discrimination Employment Protection Race Relation Employment Agency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. *14.
    This is by no means clear. S. 8 (2) permitted discrimination if done ‘in good faith for the purpose of securing or preserving a reasonable balance of persons of different “racial groups”‘. Under s. 8 (4) ‘racial group’ meant ‘persons defined by reference to colour, race or ethnic or national origins’, which would appear to permit differentiation and ‘balance’ of Indians and Pakistanis. The question is whether the subsequent ascription in s. 8 (4) of all British-educated persons to the same racial group implies that all persons educated abroad would also be consigned to the same category. Despite what seems to be a rather widespread practice of employing members of one minority group exclusively — see e.g. Brooks, Black Employment in the Black Country: A Study of Walsall (Runnymede Trust, 1975) pp. 24–5 — this question never required interpretation by the Race Relations Board or produced litigation.Google Scholar
  2. 20.
    See the figures in the study by the Community Relations Commission, Doctors from Overseas: A Case for Consultation (1976) pp. 10–13.Google Scholar
  3. 36.
    W. I. Jennings, The Law and the Constitution (Cambridge U.P., 5th edn, 1959), pp. 170–1.Google Scholar
  4. *39.
    EPCA, s. 141 contains five subsections with varying territorial exclusions for different employment rights. The conclusion that these are more stringent than s. 8 is shared by Forde, ‘Transnational Employment and Employment Protection’, (1978) 7 I.L.J. 228.Google Scholar
  5. 50.
    A concise introduction to the international law context of British offshore oil operation is given by J. Kitchen, Labour Law and Off-Shore Oil (Croom Helm, 1977) pp. 31–4 and 54–5.Google Scholar
  6. 60.
    See the comment by I. Gault, (1978) 7 I.L.J. 239.Google Scholar
  7. 63.
    Membership of the NUS, which operates a strong closed shop in the industry, dropped from 70,000 in the early 1960s to 43,000 a decade later. B. Weekes et al., Industrial Relations and the Limits of Law (Blackwell, 1975) p. 39.Google Scholar
  8. 71.
    Department of Trade, Report of the Working Group on the Employment of Non-domiciled Seafarers (H.M.S.O., 1978).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Laurence Lustgarten 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laurence Lustgarten
    • 1
  1. 1.School of LawUniversity of WarwickUK

Personalised recommendations