Click the case name for better results:

Hillman v BBC Resources Ltd: EAT 30 Mar 2004

EAT Alleged failure by the ET to make appropriate findings of fact, to deal properly with issue of comparators, and to follow the process indicated in the Barton case in respect of the transfer of the burden of proof (section 63A Sex Discrimination Act 1975) – all dismissed – no order for costs.- leave to … Continue reading Hillman v BBC Resources Ltd: EAT 30 Mar 2004

Jones v University of Manchester: CA 10 Mar 1993

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

Croft v Royal Mail Group Plc (formerly Consignia Group plc): CA 18 Jul 2003

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

National Federation of Self Employed and Small Businesses Ltd v Philpott: EAT 31 Jan 1997

The federation, an organisation supporting and promoting the interests of small firms, is ‘an employers organisation’ for sex discrimination purposes. Citations: Times 13-Feb-1997, [1997] UKEAT 787 – 96 – 3101 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 12 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment, Discrimination Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.207136

Ministry of Defence v Wallis and Another: EAT 30 Jul 2010

EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Working outside the jurisdiction The Claimants were wives of service personnel working at NATO headquarters in Belgium and in the Netherlands – Because of that status they were eligible for, and they obtained, employment in schools attached to those headquarters – They were dismissed when their husbands’ service came to an … Continue reading Ministry of Defence v Wallis and Another: EAT 30 Jul 2010

Nelson v Carillion Services Ltd: CA 15 Apr 2003

The appellant challenged dismissal of her claim for equal pay. It had been rejected on the ground that the employer had shown a material factor justifying the difference in pay. Held: Enderby establishes that the burden of proving sex discrimination lies initially on the employee. The burden of proof in indirect discrimination cases should be … Continue reading Nelson v Carillion Services Ltd: CA 15 Apr 2003

Cass v Amt-Sybex (NI) Ltd: NIIT 30 Sep 2009

NIIT The tribunal finds that the claimant did not suffer discrimination on the grounds of sex or her part-time working status and accordingly her claims are dismissed. Judges: Mr B Greene Citations: [2009] NIIT 7 – 08IT Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 1976, Part-time Workers (Provision of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 … Continue reading Cass v Amt-Sybex (NI) Ltd: NIIT 30 Sep 2009

Lister and Others v Hesley Hall Ltd: HL 3 May 2001

A school board employed staff to manage a residential school for vulnerable children. The staff committed sexual abuse of the children. The school denied vicarious liability for the acts of the teachers. Held: ‘Vicarious liability is legal responsibility imposed on an employer, although he is himself free from blame, for a tort committed by his … Continue reading Lister and Others v Hesley Hall Ltd: HL 3 May 2001

McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd: EAT 30 Nov 2009

EAT RELIGION OR BELIEF DISCRIMINATIONUNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reason for dismissalChristian counsellor dismissed by Relate for failing to give an unequivocal commitment to counsel same-sex couples.Held: Tribunal right to dismiss claims of discrimination (direct and indirect) contrary to the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 and of unfair dismissal – London Borough of Islington v … Continue reading McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd: EAT 30 Nov 2009

Pimlico Plumbers Ltd and Another v Smith: SC 13 Jun 2018

The parties disputed whether Mr Smith had been an employee of or worker with the company so as to bring associated rights into play. The contract required the worker to provide an alternate worker to cover if necessary. Held: The company’s appeal failed. Mr Smith was a worker: ‘there were features of the contract which … Continue reading Pimlico Plumbers Ltd and Another v Smith: SC 13 Jun 2018

Securicor Omega Express Ltd v GMB (A Trade Union): EAT 7 Apr 2003

EAT The company decided to close two branches and make redundancies. They presented the closure itself as a fait accompli to the union representatives. The Tribunal found that this involved a failure to consult about ways of avoiding redundancies because the decision to close had been determined prior to any meeting with the union. Held: … Continue reading Securicor Omega Express Ltd v GMB (A Trade Union): EAT 7 Apr 2003

Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College and others: CA 23 Mar 2001

The college failed to renew contracts for lecturers on one year fixed term contracts. A greater proportion of women were subject to such contracts, and the dismissal fell entirely on part time and hourly paid workforce. The condition which the complainant relied upon as discriminatory was that in order to qualify for re-engagement she had … Continue reading Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College and others: CA 23 Mar 2001

Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd: EAT 6 Mar 2003

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

Kennedy Scott Ltd v Francis: EAT 3 May 2007

EAT Practice and Procedure – 2002 Act and Pre-action Requirements Has the Claimant complied with Step 1 of the statutory grievance procedure where he presents his complaint at a meeting with his line manager who notes it down, it is accepted, accurately and contemporaneously? Employment Tribunal decided that he had. Appeal, given the particular facts … Continue reading Kennedy Scott Ltd v Francis: EAT 3 May 2007

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

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

Alabaster v Barclays Bank Plc and Another: CA 3 May 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

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

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

European Roma Rights Centre and others v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and Another: CA 20 May 2003

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

P v S and Cornwall County Council: ECJ 30 Apr 1996

An employee at an educational establishment told management that he intended to undergo gender reassignment. He was given notice of dismissal. Held: The scope of the Directive was not confined to discrimination based on the fact that a person was of one or other sex but also extended to discrimination arising from the gender reassignment … Continue reading P v S and Cornwall County Council: ECJ 30 Apr 1996

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

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

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

Douglas v North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 19 Dec 2003

The applicant had sought a student loan to support his studies as a mature student. It was refused because he would be over 55 at the date of the commencement of the course. He claimed this was discriminatory. Held: The Convention required the state not to prevent access to education, not a duty to subsidise … Continue reading Douglas v North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 19 Dec 2003

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

Regina v Entry Clearance Officer, Bombay, Ex parte Amin: HL 1983

The House was asked whether the grant of special vouchers under the special voucher scheme introduced came within section 29 of the 1975 Act. Acts performed pursuant to a government function did not come within the meaning of service. Discrimination laws did not apply to acts done on behalf of the Crown which were of … Continue reading Regina v Entry Clearance Officer, Bombay, Ex parte Amin: HL 1983

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 Department for Communities v Cox: CANI 3 Aug 2021

PIP Arrangements not Discriminatory The claimant suffered a life limiting condition, but not so that her death could be reasonably expected within six months. She complained that the resulting unavailability of PIP and UC without assessment was discriminatory as opposed to those who were predicted not so to survive, but did in fact do so. … Continue reading The Department for Communities v Cox: CANI 3 Aug 2021

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

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

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

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

Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2): SC 19 Jun 2013

The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes. The bank sought to have the direction given under section 7 of the 2008 Act. … Continue reading Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2): SC 19 Jun 2013

Cutts v Head and Another: CA 7 Dec 1983

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

Amnesty International v Ahmed: EAT 13 Aug 2009

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

Fecitt and Others v NHS Manchester: EAT 23 Nov 2010

EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureS.47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 provides that ‘A worker has the right not to be subjected to any detriment by any act, or any deliberate failure to act, by his employer done on the ground that the worker has made a protected disclosure.’In cases where a Claimant has … Continue reading Fecitt and Others v NHS Manchester: EAT 23 Nov 2010

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

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

Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA: ECJ 13 Nov 1990

Sympathetic construction of national legislation LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC Directive designed to protect companies and third parties from the adverse effects of the doctrine of nullity. … Continue reading Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA: ECJ 13 Nov 1990

Henderson v Henderson; 20 Jul 1843

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

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

Allen and others v GMB: CA 16 Jul 2008

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

The Lord Chancellor and Another v Coker and Another: EAT 17 Jan 2001

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

Kelly v Northern Ireland Housing Executive; Loughran v Northern Ireland Housing Executive: HL 29 Jul 1998

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

A v Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police and Another: CA 5 Nov 2002

The appellant had undergone a male to female sex change, but was refused employment by the respondent before the Human Rights Act came into effect. Held: Although the Human Rights Act could not apply, the act was in breach of the Equal Treatment Directive and discrimination. The 1999 regulations were incompatible with the provisions of … Continue reading A v Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police and Another: CA 5 Nov 2002

Smith v Gardner Merchant Ltd: CA 14 Jul 1998

A male homosexual barman complained of offensive remarks about his sexuality from a female colleague. Held: When considering whether a gay man has been discriminated against on the grounds of his sex, by means of abuse in work-place, the proper comparator to test for discrimination is how a gay woman would have been treated. The … Continue reading Smith v Gardner Merchant Ltd: CA 14 Jul 1998

Mohammed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence: CA 1 May 2007

In 2000, the defendant introduced a policy to make compensation payments for those British services personnel who had been imprisoned by the Japanese in the second world war. The appellant, a citizen of Pakistan had served in the Indian Army, was captured and became a prisoner of war of the Japanese. He accepted that he … Continue reading Mohammed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence: CA 1 May 2007

Meade-Hill and Another v The British Council: CA 7 Apr 1995

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

Hilton International Hotels v Protopapa: EAT 1990

The claimant asserted constructive dismissal. Held: The trbunal rejected a submission that the absence of any provision for vicarious liability in the 1978 Act indicated that the general rule that an employer is vicariously liable for his employee’s acts done in the course of his employment did not apply. Knox J: ‘We do not regard … Continue reading Hilton International Hotels v Protopapa: EAT 1990

Sodexho Ltd v Gibbons: EAT 14 Jul 2005

EAT Deposit ordered. Order lost in post due to the Claimant putting wrong post-code on ET1. Review. Distinguishing Judgments from Orders. Strike-out. Extending time. Judges: His Honour Peter Clark Citations: [2005] UKEAT 0318 – 05 – 2907, UKEAT/0319/05/TM, UKEAT/0318/05/TM, [2005] ICR 1647, UKEAT/0320/05/TM, [2005] IRLR 836 Links: Bailii, EATn Statutes: Employment Tribunal Rules 2004 20(1) … Continue reading Sodexho Ltd v Gibbons: EAT 14 Jul 2005

Sunderland City Council v Brennan and Others: EAT 2 May 2012

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Contribution PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disclosure (1) An employment tribunal has no jurisdiction to determine claims for contribution under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 between persons jointly or concurrently liable for damage caused by an act of unlawful discrimination. Nor in any event does the 1978 Act create such … Continue reading Sunderland City Council v Brennan and Others: EAT 2 May 2012

MacDonald v Ministry of Defence: EAT 19 Sep 2000

The appellant, a homosexual, appealed against rejection of his claims for sex discrimination and sexual harassment. Judges: Lotd Johnston Citations: [2000] UKEAT 0121 – 00 – 1909, [2001] ICR 1, [2001] Emp LR 105, [2001] HRLR 5, [2000] IRLR 748, [2001] 1 All ER 620 Links: Bailii Statutes: Equal Treatment Directive 76/207/EEC, Sex Discrimination Act … Continue reading MacDonald v Ministry of Defence: EAT 19 Sep 2000

Little v Richmond Pharmacology Ltd: EAT 21 Oct 2011

EAT Jurisdictional Points : Claim In Time and Effective Date of Termination – More than three weeks after the employer decided against the Claimant’s request for flexible working, she resigned in writing with immediate effect on 19 July, claiming constructive dismissal. The employer invited her in to discuss it and she affirmed in writing her … Continue reading Little v Richmond Pharmacology Ltd: EAT 21 Oct 2011

M H Marshall v Southampton And South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching): ECJ 26 Feb 1986

ECJ The court considered the measure of compensation in a successful claim for sex discrimination arising from the health authority’s provision of an earlier compulsory retirement age for women compared with that for men in the same employment. The health authority paid her the maximum sum of pounds 6,250 which was then permitted as compensation … Continue reading M H Marshall v Southampton And South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching): ECJ 26 Feb 1986

O’Neill v Governors of St Thomas More RC School and Another: EAT 24 May 1996

The claimant had been dismissed as a teacher by the respondent Roman Catholic school after she became pregnant by a priest. She had been found to have been unfairly dismissed, but the tribunal had rejected her claim of discrimination for pregnancy. Judges: Mummery J P Citations: [1996] IRLR 372, [1997] ICR 33, [1996] UKEAT 1180 … Continue reading O’Neill v Governors of St Thomas More RC School and Another: EAT 24 May 1996

Heath v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: CA 20 Jul 2004

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

McWilliam and Others v Glasgow City Council: EAT 9 Mar 2011

EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Compromise Compromise agreements. Whether compliance with section 77(4B) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. Equal pay Claimants. No prior claims presented to Employment Tribunal. Whether the compromise agreements related to ‘particular complaints’? Whether the Claimants ‘received advice’ from an ‘independent adviser’? Whether their solicitors were ‘acting in the … Continue reading McWilliam and Others v Glasgow City Council: EAT 9 Mar 2011

Clarke and others v Stockton-On-Tees Borough Council: EAT 22 Feb 2006

EAT Appeals against Employment Tribunals’ decisions upholding the validity of conciliation contracts effected with the assistance of ACAS officers so as to preclude the Claimants from issuing and enforcing equal pay claims. In each case, ACAS officers discharged their functions under s77 Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and s18 Employment Tribunals Act 1996 which are to … Continue reading Clarke and others v Stockton-On-Tees Borough Council: EAT 22 Feb 2006

Hosso v European Credit Management Ltd: EAT 7 Jan 2011

EAT EQUAL PAY ACT SEX DISCRIMINATION – JurisdictionWhether allocation of share options, which differed between Claimant and her male comparator, gave rise to a claim under the Equal Pay Act 1970 or Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (see SDA s6(6)). On the facts found, the scheme being truly discretionary, the claim fell under the SDA. Since … Continue reading Hosso v European Credit Management Ltd: EAT 7 Jan 2011

Hewage v Grampian Health Board: SCS 14 Jan 2011

The claimant had succeeded in her claim for constructive unfair dismissal, and of sex and race discrimation at the tribunal. The EAT reversed the discrimination findings saying that the claimant had not set them out in her ET1, and the Tribunal had wrongly extended them, giving the respondents no fair notice. She now appealed against … Continue reading Hewage v Grampian Health Board: SCS 14 Jan 2011

Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College: EAT 29 Mar 2000

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

Johal v Commission for Equality and Human Rights: EAT 2 Jul 2010

EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION – Pregnancy and discriminationWhether detriment complained of by Claimant was unfavourable treatment on the grounds that she was on maternity leave (Sex Discrimination Act 1975, s3A)? Employment Tribunal found on the facts that it was not. That finding was a permissible one on the facts; there was no error in the ET’s … Continue reading Johal v Commission for Equality and Human Rights: EAT 2 Jul 2010

Nazir and Another v Asim and Another: EAT 29 Jun 2010

EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION – DirectRACE DISCRIMINATION – Direct1. Unincorporated association – practice and procedure. The Claimant was employed by the management committee of an unincorporated association. By the time of the hearing the only Respondents were (1) the unincorporated association in its own name and (2) two individual members of the management committee alleged to … Continue reading Nazir and Another v Asim and Another: EAT 29 Jun 2010

Pothecary Witham Weld (A Firm) and Another v Bullimore and Another: EAT 29 Mar 2010

EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION SEX DISCRIMINATION – Burden of Proof Ex-employee given unfavourable reference – Claim that terms of reference were partly on account of her having previously brought sex discrimination proceedings against employers – Claim decided by the Tribunal on basis of the ‘reverse burden of proof’ provisions of s. 63A of Sex Discrimination Act … Continue reading Pothecary Witham Weld (A Firm) and Another v Bullimore and Another: EAT 29 Mar 2010

EB v BA: CA 22 Feb 2006

Appeal from rejection of claim for sex discrimination – gender reassignment Judges: Hooper LJ Citations: [2006] EWCA Civ 132, [2006] IRLR 471 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 2A Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment, Discrimination Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.239106

Mingeley v Pennock and Another (T/A Amber Cars): CA 9 Feb 2004

The claimant taxi driver sought to assert race discrimination. The respondent argued that he had not been an employee, but an independent contractor. The Claimant owned his own vehicle and paid the respondents minicab operators pounds 75 per week for a radio and access to their company system, which allocated calls from customers to a … Continue reading Mingeley v Pennock and Another (T/A Amber Cars): CA 9 Feb 2004

Coll, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 24 May 2017

The appellant female prisoner asserted that the much smaller number of probation and bail hostels provided for women prisoners when released on licence was discriminatory in leaving greater numbers of women far removed from their families. Held: A declaration was granted: ‘The provision of Approved Premises in England and Wales by the Secretary of State … Continue reading Coll, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 24 May 2017

Essop and Others v Home Office (UK Border Agency): SC 5 Apr 2017

The appellants alleged indirect race and belief discrimination in the conditions of their employment by the respondent. Essop came as lead claimant challenging the tests used for promotion. Statistics showed lower pass rates for BME candidates, but with no explanation of the connection. Naaem was an imam. He began as a part time prison chaplain, … Continue reading Essop and Others v Home Office (UK Border Agency): SC 5 Apr 2017

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

Clyde and Co LLP and Another v van Winkelhof: SC 21 May 2014

Solicitor Firm Member was a Protected Worker The solicitor appellant had been a member of the firm, a limited liability partnership. She disclosed criminal misbehaviour by a partner in a branch in Africa. On dismissal she sought protection as a whistleblower. This was rejected, it being found that a member of such a firm was … Continue reading Clyde and Co LLP and Another v van Winkelhof: SC 21 May 2014

Regina v Birmingham City Council ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission: HL 1989

At the council’s independent, single-sex grammar schools there were more places available for boys than girls. Consequently the council were obliged to set a higher pass mark for girls than boys in the grammar school entrance examination. Held: The council, as local education authority, had discriminated against girls. Discrimination can take place when a woman … Continue reading Regina v Birmingham City Council ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission: HL 1989

University of Westminster v Bailey: EAT 22 Sep 2009

EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS: Extension of time: just and equitableThe Employment Judge erred when he exercised discretion to allow a Sex Discrimination Act 1975 claim 19 months out of time, the prejudice to the Respondent being considerable, on the grounds amongst others that a senior lecturer in business did not know the Act applied to men, … Continue reading University of Westminster v Bailey: EAT 22 Sep 2009

Grampian Health Board v Hewage: EAT 4 Feb 2009

EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION: Burden of proofRACE DISCRIMINATION: Inferring discrimination Tribunal found Claimant to have suffered both sex and race discrimination in course of her employment as a consultant orthodontist. On appeal, Tribunal found to have failed to carry out a like for like comparison with chosen comparators and to have, wrongly, only considered Appellants’ submissions … Continue reading Grampian Health Board v Hewage: EAT 4 Feb 2009

Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council: CA 11 Feb 2004

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

Duke v GEC Reliance Systems Limited: HL 2 Jan 1988

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

Unison GMB v Brennan and others: EAT 19 Mar 2008

EAT Jurisdictional Points Sex discrimination Can an employment tribunal make a declaration that the term of a collective agreement is void, pursuant to section 77 of the Sex Discrimination Act, at the behest of a claimant who can bring proceedings under the Equal Pay Act for breach of the equality clause, where if the claim … Continue reading Unison GMB v Brennan and others: EAT 19 Mar 2008

Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 1 Feb 2000

The question is whether, a full Employment Tribunal having been empanelled to hear and determine the appellant, Mrs Unwin’s complaint of victimisation contrary to the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Chairman of that Employment Tribunal, Mr Rich, was entitled to strike out the complaint under Rule 13(2)(e) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure and … Continue reading Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 1 Feb 2000

Equal Opportunities Commission v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: Admn 12 Mar 2007

The EOC contended amongst other things that section 4A(1)(a) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 did not fulfil its intended purpose, which was to transpose into English law provisions contained in the Equal Treatment Directive 2002/73/EC. Held: The use in section 4A(1)(a) of the expression ‘on ground of her sex’ introduced a requirement of cause … Continue reading Equal Opportunities Commission v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: Admn 12 Mar 2007

Garland v British Rail Engineering Ltd (No 2): HL 22 Apr 1982

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

Applin v Race Relations Board: HL 27 Mar 1974

A couple cared for children without fee who were referred to them by a local authority. The children they cared for included coloured children. Two individuals sought to prevent the couple caring for coloured children. The question for the House of Lords was whether the attempt by the individuals to prevent the couple so doing … Continue reading Applin v Race Relations Board: HL 27 Mar 1974

Madarassy v Nomura International Plc: CA 26 Jan 2007

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

Kettle Produce Ltd v Ward: EAT 8 Nov 2006

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