Click the case name for better results:

Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions: HL 19 Jun 2003

The court considered whether discriminatory acts after the termination of employment were caught by the respective anti-discrimination Acts. The acts included a failure to give proper references. They pursued claims on the basis of victimisation after their primary discrimination claims. Held: The 1975 and 1976 Acts were similarly phrased and the wording in the 1995 … Continue reading Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions: HL 19 Jun 2003

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

The Chief Constable of the Bedfordshire Constabulary v Graham: EAT 26 Sep 2001

The claimant was given a senior post in the force, but within the same division in which her policeman husband held a more senior post. The appointment was rescinded, and she claimed sex discrimination. She was found to have been indirectly discriminated against because of the marital relationship. The Force had suggested that the particular … Continue reading The Chief Constable of the Bedfordshire Constabulary v Graham: EAT 26 Sep 2001

Marshall v Law Centres Federation: EAT 30 Jan 2002

The appellant solicitor had been employed by the respondent. They wrote to dismiss her, after failing to obtain funding. She issued proceedings on the basis that she had been victimised after giving evidence for a co-worker in other proceedings against the Federation. The tribunal, having found the lack of funding proved, considered that to be … Continue reading Marshall v Law Centres Federation: EAT 30 Jan 2002

Swithland Motors Plc v Clarke and others: EAT 14 Jul 1993

There could be no act of discrimination under the Section 6(1)(c) of the 1975 Act in omitting to offer employment until the person allegedly responsible for the omission was in a position to offer such employment. Judges: Hull J QC Citations: [1993] UKEAT 329 – 92 – 1407, [1994] ICR 231 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex … Continue reading Swithland Motors Plc v Clarke and others: EAT 14 Jul 1993

Sirdar v Ministry of Defence: EAT 15 Sep 1995

The claimant had brought a sex discrimination claim, saying that she had bee refused opportunity to work as a chef with the Royal Marines. She and the defendants had had sought an adjournment of the claim, but this had been refused. Held: Appeal allowed. Judges: Hicks QC HHJ Citations: [1995] UKEAT 978 – 95 – … Continue reading Sirdar v Ministry of Defence: EAT 15 Sep 1995

London Underground Ltd v Edwards: EAT 14 Feb 1995

The Tribunal considered the difficulties arising where one party was not represented, but where the case gave rise to difficult questions of law. In this case the claimant alleged sex discrimination in the context of rostering arrangements making demands on her as a sole parent. The defendant appealed against a finding that it was in … Continue reading London Underground Ltd v Edwards: EAT 14 Feb 1995

Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 30 Jul 1997

Citations: [1997] UKEAT 568 – 97 – 3007 Links: Bailii Cited by: See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 1-Mar-1998 . .See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 15-Dec-1999 EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal . .See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 1-Feb-2000 The question … Continue reading Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 30 Jul 1997

Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 1 Mar 1998

Judges: Byrt QC HHJ Citations: [1998] UKEAT 351 – 98 – 0103 Links: Bailii Citing: See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 30-Jul-1997 . . Cited by: See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 15-Dec-1999 EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal . .See Also – Unwin v Sackville School … Continue reading Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 1 Mar 1998

Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 15 Dec 1999

EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal Judges: His Honour Judge Peter Clark Citations: [1999] UKEAT 1068 – 98 – 1512, EAT/1068/98, EAT/1314/98 Links: Bailii, EAT Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 30-Jul-1997 . . See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 1-Mar-1998 . … Continue reading Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 15 Dec 1999

Visa International Service Association v Paul: EAT 20 May 2003

EAT Practice and Procedure – Application/Claim. Judges: Peter Clark HHJ Citations: EAT/97/2 EAT/98/02/EAT/327/02, [2003] EAT 0097 – 02 – 2005, [2003] UKEAT 0097 – 02 – 2005, [2004] IRLR 42 Links: Bailii, Bailii, EAT Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment, Discrimination Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.189462

MacDonald v Advocate General for Scotland (Scotland); Pearce v Governing Body of Mayfield School: HL 19 Jun 2003

Three appeals raised issues about the way in which sex discrimination laws were to be applied for cases involving sexual orientation. Held: The court should start by asking what gave rise to the act complained of. In this case it was the sexual orientation of the first claimant. Discrimination for sexual orientation does not come … Continue reading MacDonald v Advocate General for Scotland (Scotland); Pearce v Governing Body of Mayfield School: HL 19 Jun 2003

Kent Constabulary v Baskerville: CA 3 Sep 2003

Whether a Chief Constable can be made liable under the 1975 Act for sexual harassment and other acts of discrimination committed by one of his officers against another of his officers. Citations: [2003] EWCA Civ 1354, [2003] ICR 1463, [2003] Po LR 437 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Police, … Continue reading Kent Constabulary v Baskerville: CA 3 Sep 2003

Saggar v Ministry of Defence: EAT 25 May 2004

Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, and that jurisdiction was not created by minimal presence here. Held: The provisions as to jurisdiction … Continue reading Saggar v Ministry of Defence: EAT 25 May 2004

Medley v Working Men’s Club and Institute Union Ltd: EAT 10 Mar 2004

EAT Sex Discrimination – Lady members of local club not allowed to be associates of CIU (umbrella organisation). S. 12 of Sex Discrimination Act 1975 not applicable as CIU not relevant organisation and ‘associates’ are not members. Judges: he Honourable Mr Justice Burton Citations: [2004] UKEAT 0782 – 03 – 1003, UKEAT/782/03/ILB Links: Bailii Employment, … Continue reading Medley v Working Men’s Club and Institute Union Ltd: EAT 10 Mar 2004

Vince-Cain v Orthet Ltd: EAT 5 Mar 2004

Unfair Dismissal – Reason for dismissal – Refusal of an application by an employer to argue that it is wrong in law under SDA 1975 section 65 to gross up an award for compensation when its own submission to the opposite effect had been accepted by the Employment Tribunal. Judges: McMullen QC HHJ Citations: [2004] … Continue reading Vince-Cain v Orthet Ltd: EAT 5 Mar 2004

Meade v Pugh and Another: QBD 5 Mar 2004

The claimant was a social work student. He attended a work experience placement, and challenged the report given by the defendants on that placement, saying it was discriminatory and defamatory. He appealed a strike out of his claim. Held: The occasion was one of qualified privilege. The claimant had to establish malice to defeat that … Continue reading Meade v Pugh and Another: QBD 5 Mar 2004

Mid-Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust v Cambridge: EAT 4 Mar 2003

EAT The claimant had presented claims of sex and disability discrimination and victimisation. She suffered injury to her throat when builders demolished a wall near her workstation. Held: The employer’s appeal was dismissed. ‘There must be many cases in which the disabled person has been placed at a substantial disadvantage in the workplace, but in … Continue reading Mid-Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust v Cambridge: EAT 4 Mar 2003

Chessington World of Adventures Ltd v Reed: EAT 27 Jun 1997

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 … Continue reading Chessington World of Adventures Ltd v Reed: EAT 27 Jun 1997

Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2): CA 20 Dec 2002

The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of andpound;25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed. Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment tribunal decision. It did not look to see whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal had erred … Continue reading Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2): CA 20 Dec 2002

Derby Specialist Fabrication Ltd v J N Burton: EAT 27 Sep 2000

Race Discrimination – Direct. After dealing with the arguments based on the history of the various statutes: ‘Whether the employer deliberately dismisses the employee on racial grounds or he so acts as to repudiate the contract by racially discriminatory conduct, which repudiation the employee accepts, the end result is the same, namely the loss of … Continue reading Derby Specialist Fabrication Ltd v J N Burton: EAT 27 Sep 2000

Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary v Chew: EAT 27 Sep 2001

The Constabulary appealed against a decision that they were guilty of indirect sex discrimination, as regards the way they had implemented part time working and shift duties. The parties differed as the pool of employees from which the comparison was to be taken. There were unresolved issues of fact, and if these would affect the … Continue reading Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary v Chew: EAT 27 Sep 2001

The Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police v A, Secretary of State for Education: EAT 2 Oct 2001

The Force appealed findings of sex discrimination against the respondent who had undergone gender reassignment. She required the fact of the procedure to be kept secret. The force refused her application for appointment since they said she would be unable to conduct searches, which were required in law to be by officers of the same … Continue reading The Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police v A, Secretary of State for Education: EAT 2 Oct 2001

Coker and Osamor v The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chancellor’s Department: CA 22 Nov 2001

The Lord Chancellor’s action in appointing to a special adviser’s post someone he already knew and trusted, without first advertising the post openly, was not an act of sex or race discrimination. Had they applied, they would not have been appointed because they were not personally known to the Lord Chancellor. In practice a post … Continue reading Coker and Osamor v The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chancellor’s Department: CA 22 Nov 2001

Regina v Secretary of State For Employment Ex Parte Seymour-Smith and Another (No 2): HL 17 Feb 2000

Although fewer men were affected by the two year qualifying period before becoming entitled not to be dismissed unfairly, the difference was objectively justified by the need to encourage employers to take staff on, and was not directly derived from any discriminatory reason. It was not a breach of the Directive. Lord Nicholls said: ‘The … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State For Employment Ex Parte Seymour-Smith and Another (No 2): HL 17 Feb 2000

Strathclyde Regional Council and others v Wallace and others (Scotland): HL 22 Jan 1998

80% of the men who had been employed since 1 April 1997 had got protection under TUPE whereas only 66.66% of the women had. It was argued that this difference in percentages was sufficient to justify a claim of indirect discrimination. Held: There was no sex discrimination where there were genuine reasons for a pay … Continue reading Strathclyde Regional Council and others v Wallace and others (Scotland): HL 22 Jan 1998

Whiffen v Milham Ford Girls’ School and Oxfordshire County Council: CA 21 Mar 2001

The local authority’s redundancy policy required the school first to choose for redundancy those on fixed term temporary contracts. The applicant’s contract had not been renewed, and she had been replaced by a teacher with lesser qualifications. The policy adversely affect more women than men and was indirect discrimination, and it was for the school … Continue reading Whiffen v Milham Ford Girls’ School and Oxfordshire County Council: CA 21 Mar 2001

C Maloney v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham; C Whatford; Governing Body of Hammersmith School and D A Williams: CA 7 May 1999

The claimant sought damages from the respondents. The case was listed to be heard over 25 days, but she sought an adjournment because of her own ill health. She appealed a refusal of the adjournment. The adjournment was refused on several grounds, including the great age of the action, and the need for a speedy … Continue reading C Maloney v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham; C Whatford; Governing Body of Hammersmith School and D A Williams: CA 7 May 1999

London Underground Limited v Edwards: CA 21 May 1998

A new driver roster imposing shift working timetables discriminated against women since significantly less in proportion of women could meet the new arrangements – indirect discrimination Citations: Times 01-Jun-1998, Gazette 24-Jun-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 876, (1998) IRLR 364 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – London Underground … Continue reading London Underground Limited v Edwards: CA 21 May 1998

Rovenska v General Medical Council: CA 4 Dec 1996

A Czechoslovakian doctor complained against the General Medical Council under Section 12(1)(a) of the 1976 Act 1976 in respect of the most recent of a series of refusals, under its rules for the grant of limited registration as a medical practitioner in this country for doctors with overseas qualifications, to exempt her from its requirement … Continue reading Rovenska v General Medical Council: CA 4 Dec 1996

Carver (Nee Mascarenhas) v Saudi Arabian Airlines: CA 17 Mar 1999

The applicant was recruited in Saudi Arabia in 1986 as a flight attendant under a contract expressed to be subject to Saudi Arabian law. After being trained in Jeddah, and then employed in India for four years, she was transferred to be based in London, from which all her tours of duty as a flight … Continue reading Carver (Nee Mascarenhas) v Saudi Arabian Airlines: CA 17 Mar 1999

Wardman v Carpenter Farrer Partnership: EAT 14 May 1993

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

Smith v Safeway Plc: EAT 9 Dec 1994

A male employee had been unlawfully discriminated against when he had been dismissed for having long hair, where the same requirements would not have been made of female employees. Citations: Ind Summary 16-Jan-1995, Times 16-Dec-1994, [1994] UKEAT 185 – 93 – 0912 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Discrimination, Employment … Continue reading Smith v Safeway Plc: EAT 9 Dec 1994

Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (No 2): ECJ 2 Aug 1993

The UK law limiting awards of damages in sex discrimination cases is unlawful, and fails to implement European directive fully. Financial compensation must be at a level adequate to achieve equality between the workers identified. Citations: Independent 04-Aug-1993, Times 04-Aug-1993, C-271/91, [1993] ECR 1-4367, [1993] EUECJ C-271/91, [1994] QB 126 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination … Continue reading Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (No 2): ECJ 2 Aug 1993

Rhys-Harper v Relaxion Group plc: CA 3 May 2001

A sex discrimination claim involving a claim by an employee for damages for sexual harassment, had to be made during the period of employment. An employer’s failure to deal properly with an allegation of sexual harassment could itself be a detriment under the Act and Directive. The fact that the statutes against sex discrimination and … Continue reading Rhys-Harper v Relaxion Group plc: CA 3 May 2001

O’Neill v Governors of St Thomas More Roman Catholic Voluntary Aided Upper School: EAT 7 Jun 1996

The dismissal by a Roman Catholic school of a teacher who was pregnant by a priest, was on the grounds of pregnancy, and for an inadmissible reason. The pregnancy was an effective cause of the adverse treatment of the Appellant by her employer. Judges: Mummery P Citations: Gazette 12-Sep-1996, Times 07-Jun-1996, [1996] IRLR 372, [1996] … Continue reading O’Neill v Governors of St Thomas More Roman Catholic Voluntary Aided Upper School: EAT 7 Jun 1996

Halfpenny v IGE Medical Systems Ltd: HL 19 Dec 2000

A woman who had taken maternity leave was deemed to have returned to work following the completion of that leave when, on the appropriate date she provided medical certificates in accordance with the contract of employment. The applicant had given notice of her intention to return after maternity leave, but obtained an extension of four … Continue reading Halfpenny v IGE Medical Systems Ltd: HL 19 Dec 2000

Brown v Rentokil Ltd: IHCS 10 Mar 1995

Mrs Brown was employed by Rentokil as a driver, transporting and changing ‘Sanitact’ units in shops. In her view, it was heavy work. She told Rentokil that she was pregnant. She had difficulties associated with the pregnancy. From 16 August 1990 onwards, she submitted a succession of four-week certificates mentioning various pregnancy-related disorders. She did … Continue reading Brown v Rentokil Ltd: IHCS 10 Mar 1995

British Coal Corporation v Smith and Others: EAT 23 Feb 1993

An application of equal pay involved consideration of 150 comparators, and at great cost to all involved. The industrial members of the tribunal, with the support of the legal member, criticised the delay and complexity of Employment law. The growing complexity of industrial law was operating against the interests of those seeking to work within … Continue reading British Coal Corporation v Smith and Others: EAT 23 Feb 1993

Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council v Scanlon: EAT 22 May 2007

Unfair dismissal – Automatically unfair reasons/ Reasonableness of dismissal Appeal on the grounds that the Employment Tribunal had not applied the correct statutory tests of causation under s.103A Employment Rights Act 1996 and s.4(1) Sex Discrimination Act 1975 upheld. The Employment Tribunal erred in finding only a causation link and failed to apply the statutory … Continue reading Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council v Scanlon: EAT 22 May 2007

Cornelius v University College of Swansea: CA 1987

A college declined to act on an employee’s transfer request or to operate their grievance procedure while proceedings under the 1975 Act, brought by the employee against the college, were still awaiting determination. The college was trying to protect itself. Held: An unjustified sense of grievance cannot amount to a detriment in discrimination law. The … Continue reading Cornelius v University College of Swansea: CA 1987

Barry v Midland Bank Plc: EAT 25 Oct 1996

It was not sex discrimination to calculate severance pay for an employee on her current part time earnings. Citations: Times 25-Oct-1996 Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 6(2) Citing: See Also – Barry v Midland Bank Plc EAT 2-Feb-1996 Appeal from rejection of sex discrimination claim . . Cited by: Appeal from – Barry v Midland … Continue reading Barry v Midland Bank Plc: EAT 25 Oct 1996

Porcelli v Strathclyde Regional Council: EAT 1985

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

Department of the Environment v Fox: 1980

A rent officer, although holding a statutory office and not in employment, came within section 85(2)(b) because she performed services on behalf of the Crown for the purposes of a statutory body, namely a rent assessment committee. Judges: Slynn J Citations: [1980] 1 All ER 58 Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 85(2)(b) Cited by: Cited … Continue reading Department of the Environment v Fox: 1980

Ministry of Defence v Jeremiah: CA 1980

The court considered the meaning of ‘detriment’ in discrimination law. Brightman LJ said: ‘I think a detriment exists if a reasonable worker would or might take the view that the duty was in all the circumstances to his detriment.’Lord Justice Brandon said: ‘I do not regard the expression ‘subjecting . . to any other detriment’ … Continue reading Ministry of Defence v Jeremiah: CA 1980

Chief Constable of Kent County Constabulary v Baskerville: CA 3 Sep 2003

The claimant sought damages for sex discrimination by fellow police officers in an action against the Chief Constable. The Chief Constable said he was liable for the unlawful acts of fellow officers. Held: Anything done by an employee was done also by the employer under section 41(2). The law had been changed after Liversidge. A … Continue reading Chief Constable of Kent County Constabulary v Baskerville: CA 3 Sep 2003

Zaiwalla and Co (a Firm) v Walia: EAT 24 Jul 2002

The claimant sought aggravated damages for the aggressive way the respondent firm had defended her action for sex discrimination. Held: In exceptional circumstances, and this was one, the tribunal could award additional damages where a respondent behaved in his defence in an over-enthusiastic way: ‘If a respondent misconducts himself in the defence of a discrimination … Continue reading Zaiwalla and Co (a Firm) v Walia: EAT 24 Jul 2002

Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd: CA 20 Dec 1991

The applicant had been taken on to stand in for an employee taking maternity leave. She herself became pregnant, and she was dismissed. Her clam for sex discrimination had been rejected by the industrial tribunal and EAT. Held: Since a man who had been recruited in the same situation would have been dismissed if he … Continue reading Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd: CA 20 Dec 1991

Page v Freight Hire (Tank Haulage) Ltd: EAT 1981

The complainant was a female lorry driver, aged 23, employed by a firm specialising in the carriage of chemicals. One chemical was potentially embryotoxic, and the manufacturers warned that special precautions should be taken to avoid women of child-bearing age being exposed to it. The employers therefore refused to allow the complainant to drive lorries … Continue reading Page v Freight Hire (Tank Haulage) Ltd: EAT 1981

Knight v Attorney General: 1979

A judge’s status does not bring her within the scope of the 1975 Act as an ’employee’. Citations: [1979] ICR 194 Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – O’Brien v Department for Constitutional Affairs CA 19-Dec-2008 The claimant was a part time recorder. He claimed to be entitled to … Continue reading Knight v Attorney General: 1979

Strathclyde Regional Council v Wallace: HL 1988

Female teachers carried out the work of principal teachers but had not been appointed to the promoted post and were paid less than they would have received had they been so appointed. They claimed equal pay with male comparators who were appointed principal teachers. Like work was established and it was agreed that disparity in … Continue reading Strathclyde Regional Council v Wallace: HL 1988

Amies v Inner London Education Authority: EAT 1977

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

Haughton v Olau Line (UK) Ltd: CA 1986

The applicant was a cashier on a ship. She made a complaint of sex harassment and discrimination. The defendant denied that the court had jurisdiction because she worked abroad. Held: Her work was done mainly outside Great Britain. Neill LJ said: ‘Thus s10(1) provides in effect that for the purposes of Part II all employment … Continue reading Haughton v Olau Line (UK) Ltd: CA 1986

Hall v Woolston Hall Leisure Limited: CA 23 May 2000

The fact that an employment contract was tainted with illegality of which the employee was aware, did not deprive the employee of the possibility of claiming rights which were due to her under a statute which created rights associated with but not dependent upon the contract. There could be no derogation from the European Directive … Continue reading Hall v Woolston Hall Leisure Limited: CA 23 May 2000

The Lord Chancellor, The Lord Chancellors Department v J Coker, M Osamor: EAT 17 Jan 2001

A special adviser was not a civil servant subject to the normal rules governing such, and nor was the appointment of that adviser. The appellant had chosen his special adviser without advertisement, and had chosen someone well known to him. The requirement was not only that someone be appointed who was known to the Chancellor, … Continue reading The Lord Chancellor, The Lord Chancellors Department v J Coker, M Osamor: EAT 17 Jan 2001

Ratcliffe and Others v North Yorkshire County Council: HL 7 Jul 1995

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

Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission: HL 15 Dec 2005

The claimant appealed after her claim for sex discrimination had failed. She had been dismissed from her position an associate minister of the church. The court had found that it had no jurisdiction, saying that her appointment was not an employment. However the jurisdiction in sex discrimination cases was wider, extending to those who ‘contract … Continue reading Percy v Church of Scotland Board of National Mission: HL 15 Dec 2005

Ministry of Defence v Cannock and Others: EAT 2 Aug 1994

Compensation awarded for a pregnancy dismissal was to assume that the worker would ready to work again after six months. Review and guidelines of damages for unfair dismissal for pregnancy. The hypothetical question requires careful thought before it is answered. It is a difficult area of the law. It is not like an issue of … Continue reading Ministry of Defence v Cannock and Others: EAT 2 Aug 1994

Chisholm and Others v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council and Another; Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council v B and Q Plc: ChD 27 May 1993

The Sunday trading law banning trading on Sunday’s does not create any situation of sex discrimination. Citations: Times 27-May-1993, Independent 27-May-1993 Statutes: Shops Act 1950 47, Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Discrimination, Local Government Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79102

AM v WC and SPV: EAT 2 Sep 1999

A claim for sex discrimination can be brought against an employee of an organisation as well as the organisation itself, provided that the claim arises from actions which could also be held to be those of the employer. Employees are agents of their employers. Citations: Gazette 02-Sep-1999, (1999) IRLR 410 Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 … Continue reading AM v WC and SPV: EAT 2 Sep 1999

Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex parte Kassam: CA 1980

Discrimination was alleged against the immigration authorities. Held: In dealing with people coming in under the immigration rules, the immigration authorities were not providing ‘services’ within the meaning of the Act. The words the ‘circumstances relevant for the purposes of any provision of this Act’ are the circumstances in which discrimination is prohibited by the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex parte Kassam: CA 1980

Chief Constable of Cumbria v McGlennon: EAT 15 Jul 2002

Citations: [2002] UKEAT 10 – 01 – 1507, [2002] Emp LR 1148, [2002] ICR 1156, [2002] Po LR 202 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Fisher v Oldham Corporation KBD 1930 On Officer was subject to a claim for false imprisonment on an unlawful arrest, and it … Continue reading Chief Constable of Cumbria v McGlennon: EAT 15 Jul 2002

Pearce v Mayfield School: CA 31 Jul 2001

The claimant teacher was a lesbian. She complained that her school in failed to protect her against abuse from pupils for her lesbianism. She appealed against a decision that the acts of the pupils did not amount to discrimination, and that the school were no responsible for it. The 1998 Act had come into effect. … Continue reading Pearce v Mayfield School: CA 31 Jul 2001

XC Trains Ltd v CD and Others: EAT 28 Jul 2016

EAT Sex Discrimination : Comparison – Justification The Employment Tribunal did not err in deciding that a provision criterion or practice (‘PCP’) which required train drivers employed by the First Respondent to work at least 50% of their roster and on a number of Saturdays put women at a particular disadvantage. They correctly based their … Continue reading XC Trains Ltd v CD and Others: EAT 28 Jul 2016

The Law Society v Kamlesh Bahl: EAT 7 Jul 2003

EAT Sex Discrimination – DirectThe complainant had been suspended from her position as Vice President of the Law Society. The Society and its officers appealed findings of sex and race discrimination against her. The complainant appealed findings that she had lied to the tribunal on oath, and that the discrimination had been only indirect. Held: … Continue reading The Law Society v Kamlesh Bahl: EAT 7 Jul 2003

Moore v Marks and Spencer Plc: EAT 17 May 2010

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Amendment The Employment Judge did not err in refusing an application, in the form of a new claim, to amend to add claims out of time under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the Maternity Employment Tribunal Regulations. It was still open to the Claimant to have her second claim, … Continue reading Moore v Marks and Spencer Plc: EAT 17 May 2010

Gillick v BP Chemicals: EAT 1993

Ms Gillick had made an application based on sex discrimination in the first place against an agency which had contracted out her services to various divisions of BP Chemicals Ltd. The Respondents were the Company which had done that and in their Notice of Appearance they disputed that there had been an employment relationship between … Continue reading Gillick v BP Chemicals: EAT 1993

British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others: EAT 26 Mar 1997

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 … Continue reading British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others: EAT 26 Mar 1997

The Solicitors Regulation Authority v Mitchell: EAT 17 Feb 2014

EAT Sex Discrimination : Direct – The Claimant and a male comparator were permitted to work from home on certain days each week to facilitate child care arrangements. The Claimant’s right to do so was revoked, although she was offered the facility of more flexible working hours. The explanation for the Claimant’s apparently less favourable … Continue reading The Solicitors Regulation Authority v Mitchell: EAT 17 Feb 2014

James v Eastleigh Borough Council: CA 1985

The plaintiff was used to going swimming. He was 60. He complained that whereas his wife, of the same age was admitted free, he had had to pay .75p. He claimed sex discrimination. Held: Though his claim failed, Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson V-C said: ‘it is not permissible for a defendant in such a case to … Continue reading James v Eastleigh Borough Council: CA 1985

Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 1): HL 3 Mar 1993

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

Igen Ltd v Wong: CA 18 Feb 2005

Proving Discrimination – Two Stage Process Each appeal raised procedural issues in discrimination cases, asking where, under the new regulations, the burden of proof had shifted. Held: The new situation required a two stage process before a complaint could be upheld. First the claimant had to establish facts allowing the tribunal to conclude, in the … Continue reading Igen Ltd v Wong: CA 18 Feb 2005

Simpson v Intralinks: EAT 15 Jun 2012

EAT The parties agreed that in the event of any employment dispute , the applicable law would be German, and the place of jurisdiction Frankfurt, which was where the claimant lived and from where she worked (though she came on occasion to the UK). She brought claims under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and Equal … Continue reading Simpson v Intralinks: EAT 15 Jun 2012

Stewart v Cleveland Guest (Engineering) Ltd: EAT 4 May 1994

A display of nude images at a workplace may be discriminatory as sexual harassment, but some common sense was needed. The display of soft-porn photographs in a workplace need not of itself be subjecting a female worker to a detriment.Mummery J P considered an appeal on the grounds of perversity: ‘Whenever an appeal is based … Continue reading Stewart v Cleveland Guest (Engineering) Ltd: EAT 4 May 1994

Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 2): HL 20 Oct 1995

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

Deer v University of Oxford: CA 6 Feb 2015

The claimant had previously succeeded in a claim of sex discrimination against the University, her former employer. She now appealed against rejection of her claims alleging later victimisation. Held: Two appeals succeed, and those matters remitted to the tribunal for reconsideration: ‘I do not see why not: if the appellant were able to establish that … Continue reading Deer v University of Oxford: CA 6 Feb 2015

Eversheds Legal Services Ltd v De Belin: EAT 6 Apr 2011

eversheds_dbEAT11 EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION – DirectSEX DISCRIMINATION – Pregnancy and discriminationSEX DISCRIMINATION – Other lossesUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissalUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Polkey deductionMale claimant and female comparator absent on maternity leave in redundancy selection pool – On one criterion (‘lock up’) Claimant given low (actual) score but comparator given (notional) maximum score since because … Continue reading Eversheds Legal Services Ltd v De Belin: EAT 6 Apr 2011

Hewage v Grampian Health Board: SC 25 Jul 2012

The claimant had been employed as a consultant orthodontist. She resigned claiming constructive dismissal and sex and race discrimination. The EAT reversed the findings on discrimination saying that they had not been sufficiently pleaded. The Court of Session re-instated the discrimination findings and the Board now appealed. Held: The Board’s appeal failed. Although the positions … Continue reading Hewage v Grampian Health Board: SC 25 Jul 2012

St Helens Borough Council v Derbyshire and others: HL 25 Apr 2007

The claimants were pursuing an action for equal pay. Several others settled their own actions, and the respondents then wrote direct to the claimants expressing their concern that the action ws being continued and its possible effects. The claimants said that this amounted to victimisation. Held: The employees’ appeal succeeded. The letter amounted to unfair … Continue reading St Helens Borough Council v Derbyshire and others: HL 25 Apr 2007

James v Eastleigh Borough Council: HL 14 Jun 1990

Result Decides Dscrimination not Motive The Council had allowed free entry to its swimming pools to those of pensionable age (ie women of 60 and men of 65). A 61 year old man successfully complained of sexual discrimination. Held: The 1975 Act directly discriminated between men and women by treating women more favourably on the … Continue reading James v Eastleigh Borough Council: HL 14 Jun 1990

Dundee City Council v Malcolm: EAT 25 Jul 2008

EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION: Vicarious liability Sexual harassment claim by an employee of an education authority. Circumstances in which tribunal had misdirected itself as to its own prior judgment and erred in continuing the claim straight to a remedies hearing when an issue of time bar, and, depending on the resolution of that issue, an issue … Continue reading Dundee City Council v Malcolm: EAT 25 Jul 2008

Regina v Secretary of State Employment, ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission and Another: HL 4 Mar 1994

The Equal Opportunities Commission sought judicial review to test whether English employment law was in breach of EC law where threshold conditionsions for part time workers to make unfair dismissal and redundancy law claims were discriminatory. Held: The different employment rights for part timers were a form of indirect discrimination because they affected women more … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State Employment, ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission and Another: HL 4 Mar 1994

Science Research Council v Nasse; BL Cars Ltd (formerly Leyland Cars) v Voias: HL 1 Nov 1979

Recent statutes had given redress to anyone suffering unlawful discrimination on account of race sex or trade union activities. An employee sought discovery of documents from his employer which might reveal such discrimination. Held: The court ought not to order breach of properly given confidences unless it is necessary in the interests of justice. Lord … Continue reading Science Research Council v Nasse; BL Cars Ltd (formerly Leyland Cars) v Voias: HL 1 Nov 1979

Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) v Charity Commission for England and Wales and Another: ChD 17 Mar 2010

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