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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
EAT Sex Discrimination – Transsexualism Unfair Dismissal – Constructive dismissal Gender reassignment. Employer’s lack of knowledge. Meaning of ‘treats’ (SDA s2A(1)(a). Constructive dismissal – proper formulation of implied term of mutual trust and confidence; see Woods (EAT); cf. BCCI (per Lord Steyn). Judges: Peter Clarke J Citations: [2006] UKEAT 0240 – 06 – 1412, UKEAT/0240/06, … Continue reading Baldwin v Brighton and Hove City Council: EAT 14 Dec 2006
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
Judges: Hull QC HHJ Citations: [1994] UKEAT 529 – 94 – 1710 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment, Discrimination Updated: 19 June 2022; Ref: scu.210184
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
EAT Sex discrimination: compensation – An award of compensation for injury to feelings, pursuant to a finding of unlawful discrimination on the grounds of gender or victimisation is to be made without reference to taxation. The Tribunal correctly decided this matter. Where an employee had, in mitigation of her losses, undertaken an education course, it … Continue reading Orthet Ltd v Vince-Cain: EAT 12 Aug 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
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
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
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
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 where a crime of specific intent was under consideration, including Hyam . . they suggest to me that … Continue reading Regina v Moloney: HL 21 Mar 1984
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
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
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
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
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
Waite J said: ‘The concept of a contract for the engagement of personal work or labour lying outside the scope of a master-servant relationship is a wide and flexible one, intended by Parliament in our judgment to be interpreted as such.’ The concept could include somebody who was self-employed providing personal services. Judges: Waite J … Continue reading Quinnen v Hovells: 1984
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
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
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
The employee had failed to mention at the hearing of his claim for a redundancy payment a fact which was arguably highly material to the issue of whether his refusal of alternative employment was reasonable; and his claim had been dismissed. He applied for a review. Held: The court was asked whether, and in what … Continue reading Flint v Eastern Electricity Board: EAT 1975
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
Extra Diision, Inner House – Appeal from EAT against finding of sex discrimination Lord Bracadale [2013] ScotCS CSIH – 86 Bailii Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Scotland Employment Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.517017
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
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
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
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004
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
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
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 claimant had been a cook. A poster was put up at work redrawn to show her in a sexually suggestive pose. The court now considered an appeal agreed by consent by the parties. Held: Since the case had been heard, the Court of Appeal in Tower Boot had amended the law, and the appeal … Continue reading AB v CD: EAT 13 Nov 1997
The employees commenced a series of sex discrimination claims against the appellant. Many had settled, and the council wrote directly to the remaining claimants. The claimants said this amounted to intimidation because the council had not gone through their legal representatives, and as such was victimisation. Held: The council’s appeal succeeded. The tribunal had not … Continue reading St Helens Metroploitan Borough Council v Derbyshire and others: CA 29 Jul 2005
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Complaint was made within time limit when the decision complained of was a reconsideration of an earlier decision, not just a reference back to it. Held: In a sex discrimination case, where there has been a constructive dismissal, time runs from the date of the employer’s breach and not from the date of the employee’s … Continue reading Cast v Croydon College: CA 19 Mar 1998
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 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
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
Judges: Mr Justice Mummery (President) Citations: [1995] UKEAT 107 – 93 – 2702 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 1(1)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.208917
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 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
The court was asked whether the claimant had been dismissed or had resigned. He had attended a meeting to be told that his contract was to be finished. The company later complained that he had resigned when they were unable to reach a compromise on the terms. Held: The appeal succeeded. The case was to … Continue reading Sandhu v Jan De Rijk Transport Ltd: CA 10 May 2007
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
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
EAT Sex Discrimination : Marital Status: A was married to the Chief Executive of R1 (H). She had for some time worked for R1 as a contractor. It was R1’s case that the Chairman told H that from the end of 2009 he should not employ any member of his family in the business, because … Continue reading Hawkins v Atex Group Ltd and Others: EAT 13 Mar 2012
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
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
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Parties The Claimant brought proceedings against the First Respondents under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, partly arising out of alleged harassment by the Appellant, a former colleague. She advanced no claim against the Appellant and made it clear that she had no wish to do so; but the First Respondents … Continue reading Beresford v Sovereign House Estates and Another: EAT 29 Nov 2011
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
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
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
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
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
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 – 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
The applicant was, at the material time, a Lieutenant in the Royal Army. She was dismissed from the armed forces pursuant to the policy of the Ministry of Defence against homosexuals in the armed forces. The applicant submitted a claim to the Employment Tribunal arguing that her dismissal, and the treatment to which she was … Continue reading Chambers v The United Kingdom: ECHR 11 Dec 2007
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
EAT Jurisdictional points – Agency relationships Sex discrimination – Contract workers The Claimant was employed by CSV to work at a prison. The prison had an arrangement, but not a contract, with CSV and so the prison could not be liable to the Claimant as a contract worker under Sex Discrimination Act 1975 s9, nor … Continue reading Vidal-Hall v Hawley and others: EAT 21 Feb 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
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
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
