Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Discrimination - From: 1997 To: 1997

This page lists 50 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.

 
British Road Services Ltd v Loughran [1997] IRLR 92
1997
CA
Lord Justice Kerr
Employment, Discrimination
Lord Justice Kerr said: 'Firstly, as I have pointed out, it was the applicant in Enderby [1993] IRLR 591 who first used the expression 'almost exclusively' to refer to the female group. I consider that the Court of Justice was merely reflecting the factual situation which obtained in that case in so stating its conclusion. Secondly, and more importantly, the relevance of the number of females in the group is an indicator of it being traditionally a less well paid group on account of its being composed mainly of women. Logically a group comprising 75% females and 25% males has the capacity to provide such an indication. Whether it does in fact is a matter for the tribunal to decide.'
1 Citers


 
Glasgow City Council v Zafar [1997] SLT 281; [1997] 1 WLR 1659
1997
SCS
The Lord Justice Clerk, Lords McCluskey and Morison
Discrimination, Scotland
The house considered the burden of proof in cases involving allegations of discrimination. Held: Lord Morison "The requirement necessary to establish less favourable treatment which is laid down by section 1(1) of the Act of 1976 is not one of less favourable treatment than that which would have been accorded by a reasonable employer in the same circumstances, but of less favourable treatment than that which had been or would have been accorded by the same employer in the same circumstances. It cannot be inferred, let alone presumed, only from the fact that an employer has acted unreasonably towards one employee, that he would have acted reasonably if he had been dealing with another in the same circumstances."
The fact that, for the purposes of the law of unfair dismissal, an employer has acted unreasonably casts no light on the question whether he has treated the employee "less favourably" for the purposes of the 1976 Act: "The requirement necessary to establish less favourable treatment which is laid down by section 1(1) of the Act of 1976 is not one of less favourable treatment than that which would have been accorded by a reasonable employer in the same circumstances, but of less favourable treatment than that which had been or would have been accorded by the same employer in the same circumstances. It cannot be inferred, let alone presumed, only from the fact that an employer has acted unreasonably towards one employee, that he would have acted reasonably if he had been dealing with another in the same circumstances."
Race Relations Act 1976
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
London Underground Ltd v Edwards [1997] UKEAT 16_96_1301
13 Jan 1997
EAT
Morison P J
Employment, Discrimination

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Mugford v Midland Bank Plc [1997] UKEAT 760_96_2301; [1997] IRLR 208; [1997] ICR 399
23 Jan 1997
EAT
Judge Peter Clark
Employment, Discrimination
The court considered the test for reasonableness in a procedure for selection for redundancy. Peter Clarke J said: "As to whether a reasonable employer would or would not consult with an individual employee is, it seems to us, essentially a question of fact for the industrial jury, properly directing itself." and "It is in these circumstances that consultation between the employer and individuals identified for redundancy becomes important. It should normally take place before a final decision to dismiss is reached. It gives the employee an opportunity to put his case to the manager carrying out the selection, so that the latter may reach a fully informed decision." He summarised the authorities: "Where no consultation about redundancy has taken place with either the trade union or the employee the dismissal will normally be unfair, unless the industrial tribunal finds that a reasonable employer would have concluded that consultation would be an utterly futile exercise in the particular circumstances of the case . . It will be a question of fact and degree for the industrial tribunal to consider whether consultation with the individual and/or his union was so inadequate as to render the dismissal unfair. A lack of consultation in any particular respect will not automatically lead to that result. The overall picture must be viewed by the tribunal up to the date of termination to ascertain whether the employer has or has not acted reasonably in dismissing the employee on the grounds of redundancy."
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
National Federation of Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd v Philpott Times, 13 February 1997; [1997] UKEAT 787_96_3101
31 Jan 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination
The federation, an organisation supporting and promoting the interests of small firms, is 'an employers organisation' for sex discrimination purposes.
Sex Discrimination Act 1975 12
[ Bailii ]
 
Preston and others v Wolverhampton Healthcare Trust Secretary of State for Health [1997] EWCA Civ 1013
13 Feb 1997
CA

Discrimination

1 Cites

1 Citers


 
A v B and Another [1997] UKEAT 220_97_1802
18 Feb 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination
The respondents appealed against a finding of unlawful sex discrimination. The claimant had been seeking psychotherapy, and the defendant sought discovery of her therapy history. Held: The notes may have been relevant, and an order should have been made for their disclosure.
Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Gregory v The United Kingdom; ECHR 25-Feb-1997 - Times, 27 February 1997; 22299/93; (1997) 25 EHRR 577; [1997] ECHR 9

 
 Dr Akena Adoko v Law Society; CA 7-Mar-1997 - [1997] EWCA Civ 1187

 
 Regina v Secretary of State for Employment, ex parte Seymour Smith (1); HL 13-Mar-1997 - Times, 14 March 1997; [1997] UKHL 11; [1997] 2 All ER 273; [1997] 1 WLR 473; [1997] ICR 371; [1997] IRLR 315
 
Lewis Woolf Griptight Ltd v Corfield [1997] UKEAT 1073_96_2503; [1997] IRLR 432
25 Mar 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination
The applicant succeeded on her claim of sex discrimination even though her pregnancy was not the principal reason for her dismissal (and therefore the claim for automatic unfair dismissal failed).
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others [1997] UKEAT 496_96_2603; [1997] IRLR 336
26 Mar 1997
EAT
Smith J
Employment, Discrimination
The employer appealed against a decision by the tribunal that it had jurisdiction to hear the complaints of sex discrimination. The tribunal had extended the time for the claim on the just and equitable basis. Held. The EAT set out five criteria for answering whether to extend time: "(a) the length of and reasons for the delay;
(b) the extent to which the cogency of the evidence is likely to be affected by the delay;
(c) the extent to which the party sued had co-operated with any requests for information.
(d) the promptness with which the plaintiff acted once he or she knew of the facts giving rise to the cause of action.
(e) the steps taken by the plaintiff to obtain appropriate professional advice once he or she knew of the possibility of taking action."
Smith LJ discussed section 33 of the 1980 Act: "That section provides a broad discretion for the Court to extend the limitation period of three years in cases of personal injury and death. It requires the court to consider the prejudice which each party would suffer as the result of the decision to be made and also to have regard to all the circumstances and in particular, inter alia, to -
(a) the length of and reasons for the delay;
(b) the extent to which the cogency of the evidence is likely to be affected by the delay;
(c) the extent to which the party sued had cooperated with any request for information;
(d) the promptness with which the plaintiff acted once he or she knew of the facts giving rise to the cause of action;
(e) the steps taken by the plaintiff to obtain appropriate professional advice once he or she knew of the possibility of taking action."
Sex Discrimination Act 1975 76(1) - Limitation Act 1980 33
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Secretary of State for Defence Ex Parte Perkins; CA 9-Apr-1997 - Gazette, 09 April 1997; Times, 08 April 1997

 
 Mensah v East Hertfordshire NHS Trust; CA 25-Apr-1997 - [1997] EWCA Civ 1527
 
Vishwanath v Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust [1997] UKEAT 247_97_0205
2 May 1997
EAT
Lindsay J
Employment, Discrimination

[ Bailii ]
 
A and Another v B and others [1997] UKEAT 145_97_0205
2 May 1997
EAT
Morison J P
Employment, Discrimination
Appeal against order on application for disjoinder of certain parties,
[ Bailii ]
 
Drachmpaehl v Urania Immobilienservice Ohg Times, 02 May 1997; C-180/95; [1997] EUECJ C-180/95
2 May 1997
ECJ

Discrimination, European
A three month time limit for compensation in national law for unequal treatment in employment matters was not a breach of the Directive.
EC Treaty Art 177
[ Bailii ]
 
Handels-og Kontorfunktionaerernes Forbund i Danmark, acting on behalf of Larsson v Dansk Handel and Service, acting on behalf of Ftex Supermarked A/S [1997] EUECJ C-400/95
29 May 1997
ECJ

Employment, Discrimination
(Judgment) Social policy - Men and women - Access to employment and working conditions - Equal treatment - Dismissal of a woman on grounds of absence due to an illness attributable to pregnancy or confinement - Permissible - Account taken, when calculating the period providing grounds for dismissal, of absence outside periods of maternity leave - Permissible (Council Directive 76/207, Arts 2(1) and (3) and 5(1))
Without prejudice to provisions of national law for the protection of women, particularly with regard to pregnancy and maternity, adopted pursuant to Article 2(3) of Directive 76/207 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions, Article 5(1), in conjunction with Article 2(1), thereof does not preclude dismissals which are the result of absences due to an illness attributable to pregnancy or confinement, even where that illness arose during pregnancy and continued during and after maternity leave.
In particular, the principle of equal treatment enshrined in the Directive does not preclude account being taken of a woman's absence from work between the beginning of her pregnancy and the beginning of her maternity leave when calculating the period providing grounds for her dismissal under national law. During the maternity leave accorded to her pursuant to national law, a woman is protected against dismissal on grounds of absence. To take absence during such a period into account as grounds for a subsequent dismissal would thus be contrary to the objective pursued by Article 2(3) of the Directive, and would deprive that provision of its effectiveness. Outside periods of maternity leave, however, and in the absence of any national or, as the case may be, Community provisions affording women specific protection, a woman is not protected under the Directive against dismissal on grounds of periods of absence due to an illness attributable to pregnancy.
[ Bailii ]

 
 British Telecommunications Plc v Williams; EAT 3-Jun-1997 - Gazette, 14 January 1998; [1997] IRLR 668; [1997] UKEAT 1340_95_0306
 
Weathersfield Ltd (T/A Van and Truck Rentals) v Sargent [1997] UKEAT 1414_96_0606
6 Jun 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Noorani v Merseyside TEC Ltd [1997] UKEAT 55_96_1706
17 Jun 1997
EAT
Hull QC J
Employment, Discrimination
The claimant appealed against the dismissal of his complaint of race discrimination saying that the tribunal had erred in not issuing a witness summons. The tribunal had said that the potential evidence was not relevant. Held: There had been an error of law in the tribunal's approach and the matter was remitted. Employment Tribunals have a wide discretion in making case management orders.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Burns International Security Services (UK) Ltd v Archer [1997] UKEAT 1229_96_1906
19 Jun 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination
EAT
[ Bailii ]
 
Chessington World of Adventures Ltd v Reed [1998] ICR 97; [1997] IRLR 556; [1997] UKEAT 1063_96_2706
27 Jun 1997
EAT
Morison J
Employment, Discrimination, Judicial Review
News Group Newspapers Ltd had been joined as a party, in order that it could argue the obvious public interest relating to the importance, which has long been accepted in the courts, of the interest, not just of the press but of the public generally, in freedom of reporting and openness in court hearings. Discrimination associated with a gender re-assignment process was not sex discrimination within the Act.
Sex Discrimination Act 1975
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Kalac v Turkey [1997] ECHR 37; 20704/92; (1997) 27 EHRR 522
1 Jul 1997
ECHR

Human Rights, Discrimination
In exercising his freedom to manifest his beliefs an individual 'may need to take his specific situation into account.' "The Commission recalls that the expression "in accordance with the law", within the meaning of Article 9(2), requires first that the impugned measure should have some basis in domestic law; it also refers to the quality of the law in question, requiring that it should be accessible to the person concerned, who must moreover be able to foresee its consequences for him, and that it should be compatible with the rule of law. First, the "law" must be adequately accessible: the citizen must be able to have an indication that is adequate in the circumstances of the legal rules applicable to a given case. Secondly, a norm cannot be regarded as a "law" unless it is formulated with sufficient precision to enable a citizen to regulate his conduct: he must be able – if need be with appropriate advice – to foresee, to a degree that is reasonable in the circumstances, the consequences which a given action may entail."
"Article 9 does not protect every act motivated or inspired by a religion or belief. Moreover, in exercising his freedom to manifest his religion, an individual may need to take his specific situation into account".
European Convention on Human Rights 9(2)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Waters v Commissioner of Police for Metropolis [1997] EWCA Civ 2012
3 Jul 1997
CA

Police, Discrimination, Negligence

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
S Somjee v North West Regional Health Authority (Formerly Mersey Regional Health Authority) [1997] EWCA Civ 2042
7 Jul 1997
CA

Discrimination, Health Professions, Employment

[ Bailii ]
 
Dr Christalleni Tattari v Private Patients Plan Limited Times, 24 July 1997; [1997] EWCA Civ 2046
8 Jul 1997
CA

Discrimination
Health insurer is not body providing qualification to carry on profession or trade and not liable as such in race discrimination laws.
Race Relations Act 1976 12
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Abegaze v British Telecommunications Plc [1997] UKEAT 772_97_0907
9 Jul 1997
EAT
Kirkwood J
Employment, Discrimination

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Tchoula v Netto Foodstores Ltd [1997] UKEAT 1378_96_1407
14 Jul 1997
EAT
Morison J P
Employment, Discrimination
The appicant sought leave to appeal against refusal of his claim of race discrimination. Held: Leave was granted on one point. The Industrial Tribunal under the heading "Dismissal", referred to the fact that: "The applicant lacked the ability to be a "team player" and lack interpersonal and management skills."
"It seems to us to be arguable that an Industrial Tribunal when faced with a contention that an employee who is of an ethnic minority was not a team player or did not fit in, should recognise it as one of the warning signals which they should be astute to detect as being a potential sign of discrimination. It seems to us, therefore, that it is arguable that the Industrial Tribunal have not carried out the function which Parliament has imposed on them in a case such as this. We express no view one way or the other on this question, but it seems to us to call for debate before a full panel of the Employment Appeal Tribunal."
Race Relations Act 1976
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Elmi v Harrods Ltd and Another Harrods Ltd v Remick Harrods Ltd v Seeley [1998] ICR 156; [1997] IRLR 583; [1998] 1 All ER 52; [1997] EWCA Civ 2126
17 Jul 1997
CA

Discrimination
The claimants alleged that the way in which Harrods organised their sales worked as race discrimination. Harrods now appealed against decisions that such a case might be brought under section 7 of the 1976 Act.
Race Relations Act 1976 7
[ Bailii ]
 
Harrods Ltd v Hemick; Harrods Ltd v Seeley; Elmi v Harrods Ltd Times, 22 July 1997
22 Jul 1997
CA

Discrimination
Store setting terms for concessionaire to employ staff liable for racial discrimination in election of staff by concessionaire.
Race Relations Act 1976 7

 
Ayobiojo v London and Quadrant Housing Trust [1997] UKEAT 701_96_2507
25 Jul 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
O'Neill v Symm and Company Ltd [1997] UKEAT 885_97_1610
16 Oct 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Strathclyde Regional Council v Zafar; Zafar v Glasgow City Council; HL 16-Oct-1997 - Times, 08 December 1997; Gazette, 17 December 1997; Gazette, 26 February 1998; [1997] UKHL 54; [1997] 1 WLR 1659; [1997] IRLR 229 CS; [1998] ICR 120; 1998 SC (HL) 27; [1998] 2 All ER 953; 1998 SLT 135
 
Ministry of Defence v D J Wheeler and Ministry of Defence v S Donald and Ministry of Defence v Nixon and Ministry of Defence v J Joslyn Gazette, 26 November 1997; Times, 19 November 1997; [1997] EWCA Civ 2647
5 Nov 1997
CA

Employment, Discrimination, Damages, Armed Forces
Damages for unfair dismissal for pregnancy were to be calculated as a sum which the employee would have been earned, less any actual or putative earnings and a discount.
[ Bailii ]

 
 Nagarajan v London Regional Transport; Swiggs and London Regional Transport v Nagarajan; CA 7-Nov-1997 - [1997] EWCA Civ 2671; [1998] IRLR 73
 
Marschall v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen C-409/95; [1997] EUECJ C-409/95
11 Nov 1997
ECJ

European, Discrimination
ECJ Equal treatment of men and women - Equally qualified male and female candidates - Priority for female candidates - Saving clause
[ Bailii ]
 
AB v CD [1997] UKEAT 1272_96_1311
13 Nov 1997
EAT
Peter Clark J
Employment, Discrimination
The claimant had been a cook. A poster was put up at work redrawn to show her in a sexually suggestive pose. The court now considered an appeal agreed by consent by the parties. Held: Since the case had been heard, the Court of Appeal in Tower Boot had amended the law, and the appeal was appropriate. The case was to be remitted.
Sex Discrimination Act 1975 41(1)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Ali v Avesta Sheffield Ltd [1997] UKEAT 562_97_1711
17 Nov 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Mensah v Bell and others [1997] UKEAT 705_96_1911
19 Nov 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination

Race Relations Act 1976
[ Bailii ]
 
Mensah v Whittington Hospital NHS Trust and others [1997] UKEAT 831_96_1911
19 Nov 1997
EAT

Employment, Discrimination

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Stevenson v Lord Advocate Times, 20 November 1997
20 Nov 1997
OHCS

Discrimination
There was no sex discrimination in a difference between the pension provisions for Scots Sheriff and an English circuit judge though they were on the same salary.

 
Merseyside Tec Limited v Noorani [1997] EWCA Civ 2795
21 Nov 1997
CA

Employment, Discrimination
Application for leave to appeal. The respondent had said that the EAT had erred in overturning the tribunal chair's decision not to issue witness summonses. Held. Leave was granted.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Gerster v Freistaat Bayern Times, 24 November 1997
24 Nov 1997
ECJ

Discrimination, European
A rule calculating an entitlement to promotion according to part time work was in breach of Article and discriminatory though public service.
ECTreaty Art 119

 
Weathersfield Limited (T/a Van and Truck Rentals) v Veronica Sargent [1997] EWCA Civ 2827
25 Nov 1997
CA

Discrimination

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Hejduskova (Formerly Searle) v Raskin; CA 28-Nov-1997 - [1997] EWCA Civ 2856
 
D'Souza v Lambeth Borough Council [1997] EWCA Civ 3082
10 Dec 1997
CA

Employment, Discrimination

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Magorrian and Cunningham v Eastern Health and Social Services Board and Department of Health and Social Services Times, 22 December 1997; C-246/96; [1997] EUECJ C-246/96
11 Dec 1997
ECJ

Discrimination, European
Pension entitlements for part time workers discriminated against were to be re-calculated to allow for wrongful treatment since 1976
Europa Reference for a preliminary ruling: Office of the Industrial Tribunal and the Fair Employment Tribunal, Belfast - United Kingdom. Equal pay for men and women - Article 119 of the EC Treaty - Protocol No 2 annexed to the Treaty on European Union - Occupational social security schemes - Exclusion of part-time workers from status conferring entitlement to certain additional retirement pension benefits - Date from which such benefits are payable - National procedural time-limits.
EC Treaty Art 177
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Barry v Midland Bank Plc Gazette, 26 February 1998; Times, 29 December 1997; [1997] EWCA Civ 3037; [1999] ICR 319
18 Dec 1997
CA

Discrimination, Employment
No sex discrimination was involved in company's retirement benefits scheme even though it was affected by differences for part time workers, and even though more women worked part time
Equal Pay Act 1970
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Marks and Spencer Plc v Adell Martins Times, 15 January 1998; [1997] EWCA Civ 3067; [1998] ICR 1005
19 Dec 1997
CA

Discrimination
The court emphasised the ubiquitous need to make the findings of primary fact without which it is impossible to consider the drawing of relevant inferences. A tribunal hearing a race discrimination case must ask the question as put by the Act; there was a fundamental flaw in the decision in asking and answering wrong question.
Race Relations Act 1976
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.