Click the case name for better results:

Simpson v Endsleigh Insurance Services Ltd and Others: EAT 27 Aug 2010

EAT SEX DISCRIMINATIONBurden of proofPregnancy and discriminationUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Automatically unfair reasonsRegulation 10(3)(a) and Regulation 10(3)(b) of the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations 1999 must be read together in determining whether there is a suitable available vacancy under Regulation 10(2). Judges: Ansell J Citations: [2010] UKEAT 0544 – 09 – 2708, [2011] ICR 75 Links: … Continue reading Simpson v Endsleigh Insurance Services Ltd and Others: EAT 27 Aug 2010

Sefton Borough Council v Wainwright: EAT 13 Oct 2014

EAT Maternity Rights and Parental Leave – Sex discrimination Unfair dismissal Return to work Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations 1999 (MAPL Regs) – regulation 10 – redundancy during maternity leave and entitlement to be offered suitable available vacancy. Equality Act 2010 (EqA) – section 18 – direct discrimination because of pregnancy and maternity Appeal against … Continue reading Sefton Borough Council v Wainwright: EAT 13 Oct 2014

Hair Division Ltd v Macmillan: EAT 12 Oct 2012

EAT Sex Discrimination : Direct Inferring discrimination – Discrimination. Pregnancy. Statutory Maternity Leave/Pay. Tribunal erred in approaching employee’s allegation of discrimination on the basis that employer had wrongly denied that she was entitled to maternity leave/pay when (a) they had no jurisdiction to determine a dispute over such entitlement, and (b) even if they had, … Continue reading Hair Division Ltd v Macmillan: EAT 12 Oct 2012

Secretary of State for Justice v Slee: CA 24 Jan 2011

The claimant had been found to have been unfailry dismissed by respondent, on the termination of her employment as an assistant Clerk to the Justices. The EAT had upheld her claim, but had at first rejected her claim for long-term and retirement compensation under the 1978 Regulations. On remittal of the case, they had found … Continue reading Secretary of State for Justice v Slee: CA 24 Jan 2011

Slee v Secretary of State for Justice (1): Admn 19 Nov 2007

The claimant sought compensation under the Regulations as a result of her dismissal on the re-organisation of the Magistrates Court at Wimbledon from her position as court clerk. The EAT had allowed her claim for unfair dismissal. Her position on the re-organisation had been ring-fenced, for a choice between herself and a co-worker, but she … Continue reading Slee v Secretary of State for Justice (1): Admn 19 Nov 2007

Secretary of State for Justice v Slee: EAT 19 Jul 2007

EAT Unfair Dismissal – Constructive dismissalMaternity Rights and Parental Leave – Sex discriminationThe Claimant was employed as a Magistrates’ Clerk and she brought successful claims to the Employment Tribunal that:(a) Ms Slee (‘the Claimant’) had been constructively unfairly dismissed by The Department for Constitutional Affairs (‘the Respondent’);(b) The Respondent had failed to offer to the … Continue reading Secretary of State for Justice v Slee: EAT 19 Jul 2007

Really Easy Car Credit Ltd v Thompson: EAT 3 Jan 2018

EAT MATERNITY RIGHTS AND PARENTAL LEAVE – Unfair dismissal SEX DISCRIMINATION – Pregnancy and discrimination SEX DISCRIMINATION – Burden of proof Automatic unfair dismissal by reason of pregnancy – section 99 Employment Rights Act 1996 and regulation 20 Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999 Pregnancy discrimination – section 18 Equality Act 2010 Burden of … Continue reading Really Easy Car Credit Ltd v Thompson: EAT 3 Jan 2018

Langford v East Sussex County Council: EAT 12 Nov 2013

EAT Unfair Dismissal : Reasonableness of Dismissal – MATERNITY RIGHTS AND PARENTAL LEAVE – The decision of the Employment Tribunal that the dismissal of the Claimant for redundancy was fair was based on an erroneous view of the content of jobs that may have been available to be offered to her. Further, in assessing the … Continue reading Langford v East Sussex County Council: EAT 12 Nov 2013

Dr Anya v University of Oxford and Another: CA 22 Mar 2001

Discrimination – History of interactions relevant When a tribunal considered whether the motive for an act was discriminatory, it should look not just at the act, but should make allowance for earlier acts which might throw more light on the act in question. The Tribunal should assess the totality of the evidence on any material … Continue reading Dr Anya v University of Oxford and Another: CA 22 Mar 2001

Yeboah v Crofton: CA 31 May 2002

The industrial tribunal had made a finding of direct race discrimination. The Employment Appeal Tribunal found the decision perverse, and ordered a rehearing. The applicant appealed that order. Held: The EAT must be careful not to take disagreements as to findings on facts as faults in law. No appeal on a question of law should … Continue reading Yeboah v Crofton: CA 31 May 2002