The claimants were members of the defendant trades union which settled their claims for sex discrimination against local authorities. They said that the union had entered into a settlement which still discriminated against them, and that therefore the union was itself guilty of indirect sex discrimination. Held: The claimants’ appeal succeeded, and the matter was … Continue reading Allen and others v GMB: CA 16 Jul 2008
Appeal at the instance of the Lord Chancellor and his department against the decision of the Employment Tribunal that in the selection of a special adviser he contravened the provisions in respect of the first respondent, as she now is, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and in respect of the second respondent, as she now … Continue reading The Lord Chancellor and Another v Coker and Another: EAT 17 Jan 2001
Provisions against discrimination on religious grounds in Northern Ireland, could apply to appointment of a firm to a panel of experts, where one person was designated to carry out that work. ‘it is essential, for there to be ’employment,’ that the person making the contract shall himself undertake to do, at any rate, some of … Continue reading Kelly v Northern Ireland Housing Executive; Loughran v Northern Ireland Housing Executive: HL 29 Jul 1998
The parties had married, but the male partner was a transsexual, having been born female and having undergone treatment for Gender Identity Dysphoria. After IVF treatment, the couple had a child. As the marriage broke down the truth was revealed in court, but the plaintiff said that his wife had known the true position. He … Continue reading J v S T (Formerly J): CA 21 Nov 1996
An employee mobility clause in a contract must be justified, or it may be discriminatory against women.The potentially discriminatory effect on the complainant of the introduction of a ‘mobility clause’ to her contract of employment was a requirement capable of amounting to an act of discrimination under Sections 1(1)(b) and 6 and of rendering the … Continue reading Meade-Hill and Another v The British Council: CA 7 Apr 1995
A claim for sex discrimination based on an age requirement was wrongly based. The proportion of mature graduates was irrelevant in the appropriate pool. The Court cautioned tribunals to avoid placing artificial limitations on the scope of the pool and indicated that it should comprise all those persons, male and female, who satisfied, or would … Continue reading Jones v University of Manchester: CA 10 Mar 1993
The employee was a transsexual, awaiting completion of surgical transformation to a woman. The employer said she could not use the female toilet facilities, but was offered use of the unisex disabled facilities. Held: The 1975 Act provides for a category of persons who are not to be discriminated against. By virtue of the definition … Continue reading Croft v Royal Mail Group Plc (formerly Consignia Group plc): CA 18 Jul 2003
Compensation for non-economic loss brought about by the manner of an unfair dismissal is, on authority and on principle, recoverable. The award of such compensation by the employment tribunal in the present case was not excessive and was adequately explained. The court could look to parliamentary reports to identify the mischief sought to be rectified, … Continue reading Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council: CA 11 Feb 2004
The court was asked about the differential in retirement ages between men and women in private sector employment, and whether it constituted sex discrimination. Held: Section 2(4) of the 1972 Act did not allow a British Court to distort the meaning of a British Statute in order to enforce a Community Directive which does not … Continue reading Duke v GEC Reliance Systems Limited: HL 2 Jan 1988
The claimants sought to assert their rights under the Equal Treatment Directive, whoch had not been implemented. She had been made to retire at 60, but said that had she been a man she would not have had to retire until she reached 65 years old. She had succeeded at the Industrial Tribunal, but failed … Continue reading Doughty v Rolls Royce Plc: CA 19 Dec 1991
Under English law and under Community law, the national court should construe a regulation adopted to give effect to a Directive as intended to carry out the obligations of the Directive and as not being inconsistent with it if it is reasonably capable of bearing such a meaning. Lord Diplock said that: ‘it is a … Continue reading Garland v British Rail Engineering Ltd (No 2): HL 22 Apr 1982
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
The council had dismissed a black road sweeper to whose appointment the trade union objected on racial grounds. Held: The council’s motive for doing so, to avert industrial action, could not avail them. Woolf J said: ‘In this case although the employer’s motives are wholly unobjectionable, he is clearly treating the black employee less favourably … Continue reading Regina v Commission for Racial Equality (ex parte Westminster City Council): QBD 1984
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
The respondent sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal that he was an appropriate respondent to the claimant’s claim for sex discrimination. The claimant had been a police officer, and claimed she had been the subject of repeated and unwanted sexual advances from the respondent. He argued that only the … Continue reading SPV v AM and Another: CA 27 Aug 1999
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings. Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule of the Court correctly when I … Continue reading Henderson v Henderson: 20 Jul 1843
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
There had been a trial of 35 days regarding rights of way over land, which had proved fruitless, and where some orders had been made without jurisdiction. The result had been inconclusive. The costs order was now appealed, the plaintiff complaining that the judge had failed to take into account an offer of settlement made … Continue reading Cutts v Head and Another: CA 7 Dec 1983
Same Sex Paartner to Inherit as Family Member The claimant had lived with the original tenant in a stable and long standing homosexual relationship at the deceased’s flat. After the tenant’s death he sought a statutory tenancy as a spouse of the deceased. The Act had been extended to include as a spouse someone living … Continue reading Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd: HL 28 Oct 1999
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
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
The parties had a joint venture agreement which provided that any dispute was to be referred to an arbitrator from the Ismaili community. The claimant said that this method of appointment became void as a discriminatory provision under the 2003 Regulations. The High Court found the appointment to be outwith the provisions, but this was … Continue reading Jivraj v Hashwani: SC 27 Jul 2011
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
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
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was heard before … Continue reading Regina v Lambert: HL 5 Jul 2001
nambalatEAT2011 EAT National Minimum Wage Act 1998National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999, Reg. 2(2)Unauthorised deductions from wagesAll three Claimants were foreign domestic workers employed in the Respondents’ households. The EAT held that the work done by each of the three Claimants for their respective employers was work to which regulation 2(2) of the National Minimum Wage … Continue reading Nambalat v Taher and Another: EAT 8 Dec 2011
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
Community Law protects women from dismissal during pregnancy save in exceptional circumstances. It was discriminatory to dismiss a female not on a fixed term contract for pregnancy. The Court rejected an interpretation of the Directive that would have rendered its provisions ineffective. The dismissal of a pregnant woman recruited for an indefinite period cannot be … Continue reading Webb v EMO Air Cargo: ECJ 14 Jul 1994
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
The claimant sought to have transferred to her, her father’s agency for the wholesale distribution of Sunday newspapers. The claimant alleging sex discrimination after being refused. The company said that she was not an employee within the 1975 Act. . .
. .
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder.
Held: The appeal was allowed and a conviction for manslaughter substituted.
Lord Bridge of Harwich discussed the case of Hyam: ‘But looking on their facts at the decided cases . .
References: (1843) 3 Hare 100, [1843] EngR 917, (1843) 67 ER 313 Links: Commonlii Coram: Sir James Wigram VC The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings. Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying … Continue reading Henderson v Henderson; 20 Jul 1843
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 female civilian officer alleged sex discrimination against her by a police officer. Her complaint was heard at an internal disciplinary. She alleged sexual harrassment, and was further humiliated by the all male board’s treatment of her complaint. The complaint now was solely as to her treatment by the Board. Held: The body was a … Continue reading Heath v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: CA 20 Jul 2004
EAT Sex Discrimination – Indirect – European Material – Article 19. EAT European Material – Article 19 EAT Equal Pay Act – (no sub-topic). Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President) Citations: EAT/1080/98, EAT/1300/97, [2000] UKEAT 1300 – 97 – 2903 Links: EAT, EAT, Bailii Statutes: Equal Treatment Directive (Council Directive 76/207/EEC Jurisdiction: England and … Continue reading Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College: EAT 29 Mar 2000
EAT Sex Discrimination – Inferring DiscriminationThe claimant sought compenstion for sex discrimination. She appealed a finding of a material factor justifying the difference in pay. Held: The new provisions included reference to the Code of Practice issued by the Equal Opportunities Commission, which provided that the employer should provide a transparent system for setting pay … Continue reading Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd: EAT 6 Mar 2003
The claimant appealed against adverse findings on her claims of sex discrimination. The court considered questions arising from the provisions relating to the transfer of the burden of proof in a discrimination case. Held: Questions of the burden of proof are very common in discrimination cases: ‘The factual content of the cases does not simply … Continue reading Madarassy v Nomura International Plc: CA 26 Jan 2007
EAT Practice and Procedure – Compromise1. On the true construction of a compromise agreement in respect of claims arising on the termination of the contract of employment, claims arising during the relationship and arising otherwise than on termination were not compromised. The agreement did not meet the industry standard for such model agreements.2. Further the … Continue reading Palihakkara v British Telecommunications Plc: EAT 9 Oct 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
The claimant said that he had been indirectly discriminated against on racial grounds. He was dismissed after being elected as a local councillor for the BNP. The employer considered that for Health and Safety reasons, his dismissal was necessary because of the upset and disturbance his continued employment would create with Asian co-workers and passengers. … Continue reading A C Redfearn v Serco Ltd T/A West Yorkshire Transport Service: EAT 27 Jul 2005
The claimant sought increased maternity pay. Before beginning her maternity leave she had been awarded a pay increase, but it was not backdated so as to affect the period upon which the calculation of her average pay was based. The court made a detailed comparison of the regimes for protection under the Employment Rights Act … Continue reading Alabaster v Barclays Bank Plc and Another: CA 3 May 2005
A scheme had been introduced to arrange pre-entry clearance for visitors to the United Kingdom by posting of immigration officers in the Czech Republic. The claimants argued that the system was discriminatory, because Roma visitors were now subjected to a much more rigorous examination than others, and also that the arrangement put the respondent in … Continue reading European Roma Rights Centre and others v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and Another: CA 20 May 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
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
The claimant was a male to female trans-sexual who had been refused employment as a police officer by the respondent, who had said that the staturory requirement for males to search males and for females to search females would be impossible to comply with. She had sought to be employed on the basis that her … Continue reading A v West Yorkshire Police: HL 6 May 2004
E challenged the admissions policy of a school which admitted by preference children acknowledged to be Jewish by the Office of their Rabbi. His mother being Jewish by conversion in a progressive synagogue, E was excluded. The claimant suggested that the policy ‘elides the grounds of an act with its motive, whereas what the legislation … Continue reading E, Regina (On the Application of) v The Governing Body of JFS and Another: CA 25 Jun 2009
The claimant asserted associative disability discrimination. She was the carer for her disabled son.
Held: To succeed the claimant would have to show that associative discrimination was prohibited by the directive and that the 1995 Act could . .
The issue of justification of discrimination is rarely a simple matter. No margin of appreciation was to be allowed to an employer. It is for the tribunal to make its own judgment as to whether the practice complained of by the employee was . .
