Judges: Mr Justice Mummery (President) Citations: [1995] UKEAT 107 – 93 – 2702 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 1(1)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.208917
EAT Sex discrimination – Comparison When a male manager entered the women’s toilets and shouted at a woman on her break, the correct question which should be asked is this: would the Respondent, in the form of a female manager, with the same robust management style as this manager, treat a male cleaner having the … Continue reading Kettle Produce Ltd v Ward: EAT 8 Nov 2006
The employer appealed a finding of sex discrimination. The court criticised severely the way that the two firms of solicitors had failed to work together to put the real issues before the court. It was wrong for a party to seek to withhold documents which were relevant to the issues before the court. The behaviour … Continue reading The Premium Cream Co Ltd v K Parsons: EAT 30 Jan 2002
Industrial Tribunals to receive European guidance on sexual harassment. Citations: Times 31-May-1993, [1993] UKEAT 62 – 93 – 1405 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 1(1)(a) Citing: Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987 Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient ReasonsTribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more … Continue reading Wardman v Carpenter Farrer Partnership: EAT 14 May 1993
A woman school technician was subjected to a campaign of sexual harassment by two fellow male non-managerial technicians. She sought a transfer. Held: The real question was whether the sexual harassment was to the detriment of the applicant within section 6(2)(b). The claim of sex discrimination succeeded.Lord McDonald said: ‘It was argued on behalf of … Continue reading Porcelli v Strathclyde Regional Council: EAT 1985
The applicant complained that she was dismissed when her employers learned that she was pregnant. Held: 1(1) (a) and 5(3) of the 1975 Act were to be interpreted as meaning that where a woman had been engaged for an indefinite period, the fact that pregnancy was the reason for her temporary unavailability at a time … Continue reading Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 2): HL 20 Oct 1995
A female art teacher and deputy department head applied in 1975 to be department head at her school. In September a man was appointed instead. The 1975 Act came into force on 29th December. On 1st January 1996 she complained to the Tribunal on the basis that by appointing a man the employers discriminated against … Continue reading Amies v Inner London Education Authority: EAT 1977
Three school dinner ladies had been employed by the Council at National Rates of pay and conditions. Their work which was almost exclusively carried out by females had been rated as of equal value to that of men employed by the council at various establishments. Following compulsory tendering the council declared some of the catering … Continue reading Ratcliffe and Others v North Yorkshire County Council: HL 7 Jul 1995
amnesty_ahmedEAT2009 EAT RACE DISCRIMINATION – Direct discriminationRACE DISCRIMINATION – Indirect discriminationRACE DISCRIMINATION – Protected by s. 41UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissalClaimant, of (northern) Sudanese ethnic origin, applied for promotion to role of ‘Sudan researcher’ for Amnesty International – Not appointed because Amnesty believed that the appointment of a person of her ethnic origin would compromise … Continue reading Amnesty International v Ahmed: EAT 13 Aug 2009
Questions on pregnancy dismissals included unavailability at required time. The correct comparison under the Act of 1975 was between the pregnant woman and: ‘a hypothetical man who would also be unavailable at the critical time. The relevant circumstance for the purposes of the comparison required by section 5(3) to be made is expected unavailability at … Continue reading Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 1): HL 3 Mar 1993
E complained that his exclusion from admission to the school had been racially discriminatory. The school applied an Orthodox Jewish religious test which did not count him as Jewish because of his family history. Held: The school’s appeal failed. English law may be at fault because it made no allowance for any justification of direct … Continue reading E, Regina (on The Application of) v Governing Body of JFS and Another: SC 16 Dec 2009
The charity appealed against refusal of permission to amend its charitable objects as set out in the memorandum of association. The charity was successful as an adoption agency particularly in placing children who would otherwise have had difficulty finding a home, following the principles of the Roman Catholic Church, and it wanted to restrict its … Continue reading Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) v Charity Commission for England and Wales and Another: ChD 17 Mar 2010
