£30,000 for serial complainer

A race relations worker is to collect up to £30,000 - after suing an equal opportunities organisation for racial discrimination.

Natasha Sivanandan, 48, a serial litigant with a history of making high-profile discrimination complaints, may bankrupt a black law centre that she accused of sexism and racism.

She brought the case against Hackney Action for Racial Equality after she applied unsuccessfully for three separate posts as a race adviser. The compensation is likely to be awarded for injury to feelings.

The case is at least the fourth launched by Ms Sivanandan, who was a former race relations adviser to Brent council during its "loony Left" days, and whose father is the director of the respected Institute of Race Relations.

The legal system has been powerless to stop her bringing repeated claims, despite her running up bills for the taxpayer of £100,000 and £50,000 in two previous cases.

Her latest victory prompted condemnation from her own father, Ambalavaner, a distinguished writer on racial affairs and one of the pioneering critics of the litigation-prone "race relations industry".

He said her "constant" claims of victimisation - which date back to her days as a race adviser for Brent during the Eighties - had led to them falling out years ago.

He said: "I do not personalise issues and I think that small organisations are impoverished enough.

"All these things are blown out of all proportion. Racial and sexual cases have become a bandwagon. I do not agree with that. I believe that racial injustices should be fought within institutions."

The latest case has also infuriated bosses at Hackney Action for Racial Equality (Hare), an independent legal centre that fears it may now have to close if it is forced into paying hefty compensation.

Director Joanne Appavoo, who runs Hare on a shoestring budget, said: "We are totally shocked by the ruling. It is unbelievable that the case was brought against people who have a long history of equal opportunities and anti-discrimination work across the board of all ethnic groups. We are the only organisation providing antidiscrimination services in Hackney, and now this legal action may mean there ends up being no kind of service at all."

Eric Ollerenshaw, a Hackney Tory councillor, said: "This is litigation culture gone mad. It would be extremely sad if an organisation that is supposed to promote racial equality ended up having to close as a result."

Hare, which received about £50,000 funding from Hackney council, had to spend hundreds of hours preparing for the case, effectively reducing the number of staff available to advise clients. Ms Sivanandan submitted-legal precedent cases to the panel which indicate that she should receive a payment of up to £30,000. She represented herself and is not believed to have received legal aid.

Only two months ago, Ms Sivanandan's claim forced debt-ridden Hackney council to run up a legal bill of nearly £100,000 fighting a " completely inappropriate" race claim brought before a county court after she was sacked from a local police race relations group.

While Judge Goldstein awarded her £2,500 in "nominal damages", he said the case was not in the public interest and questioned the awarding of £40,000 in legal aid to Ms Sivanandan.

Another case against Enfield council and Enfield Racial Equality Council, brought after she was dismissed for gross misconduct in 1996, was thrown out by an employment tribunal on the grounds that it was "frivolous, vexatious and scandalous". Despite that, she is still trying to overturn the ruling via two separate cases at the Employment Appeals Tribunal. Sources at Enfield estimate the case has cost them £44,000 so far.

In 1993, while working as a trainee BBC producer, she won a large, undisclosed payout after accusing the corporation of racism. Six years earlier, she also accused a Rastafarian colleague on a panel of race advisers at Brent council of being "macho and intimidating".

Unemployed Miss Sivanandan, who has been working on the case for the past four years, was unrepentant today. She said: "I think it is appalling that a body set up to fight on behalf of victims of race discrimination should have so brazenly breached the very law they were set up to uphold."