is in the comments made by the EAT President, Elias J, on how to apply the 13 point guidance on the burden of proof rules in discrimination cases, as provided by the Court of Appeal in 2005 (in Igen Ltd and ors v Wong CA 2005 ICR 931).

A black Housing Officer claimed that he had been dismissed because he had raised allegations of bullying by reason of his race. He lost claims for race discrimination and victimisation at an employment tribunal and appealed to the EAT. He lost again. The EAT rejected sophisticated arguments relating to the burden of proof which would "significantly and artificially complicate the fundamentally simple question of asking why the employer acted as he did" and acknowledged that a tribunal need not feel strictly confined to a pedantic interpretation of the "two-stage approach" when applying the statutory burden of proof provisions in a case of alleged discrimination.

For relevant general notes see Racial discrimination/burden of proof .