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
Search Results for: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 41
AB v CD: EAT 13 Nov 1997
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
AM v WC and SPV: EAT 2 Sep 1999
A claim for sex discrimination can be brought against an employee of an organisation as well as the organisation itself, provided that the claim arises from actions which could also be held to be those of the employer. Employees are agents of their employers. Citations: Gazette 02-Sep-1999, (1999) IRLR 410 Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 … Continue reading AM v WC and SPV: EAT 2 Sep 1999
Dundee City Council v Malcolm: EAT 25 Jul 2008
EAT SEX DISCRIMINATION: Vicarious liability Sexual harassment claim by an employee of an education authority. Circumstances in which tribunal had misdirected itself as to its own prior judgment and erred in continuing the claim straight to a remedies hearing when an issue of time bar, and, depending on the resolution of that issue, an issue … Continue reading Dundee City Council v Malcolm: EAT 25 Jul 2008
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
Hawkins v Atex Group Ltd and Others: EAT 13 Mar 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Cornelius v University College of Swansea: CA 1987
A college declined to act on an employee’s transfer request or to operate their grievance procedure while proceedings under the 1975 Act, brought by the employee against the college, were still awaiting determination. The college was trying to protect itself. Held: An unjustified sense of grievance cannot amount to a detriment in discrimination law. The … Continue reading Cornelius v University College of Swansea: CA 1987
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
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
Vidal-Hall v Hawley and others: EAT 21 Feb 2008
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
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
Baldwin v Brighton and Hove City Council: EAT 14 Dec 2006
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
Sharp v Caledonia Group Services Ltd: EAT 1 Nov 2005
EAT Equal Pay Act – Material factor defence – In an equal pay claim involving a presumption of direct discrimination the genuine material factor defence requires justification by objective criteria.The claimant appealed dismissal of her action for equal pay, saying that the ‘material factor’ defence used to justify a different payment had been incorrectly applied. … Continue reading Sharp v Caledonia Group Services Ltd: EAT 1 Nov 2005
London Underground Ltd v Edwards: EAT 14 Feb 1995
The Tribunal considered the difficulties arising where one party was not represented, but where the case gave rise to difficult questions of law. In this case the claimant alleged sex discrimination in the context of rostering arrangements making demands on her as a sole parent. The defendant appealed against a finding that it was in … Continue reading London Underground Ltd v Edwards: EAT 14 Feb 1995
Saggar v Ministry of Defence: EAT 25 May 2004
Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, and that jurisdiction was not created by minimal presence here. Held: The provisions as to jurisdiction … Continue reading Saggar v Ministry of Defence: EAT 25 May 2004
Meade v Pugh and Another: QBD 5 Mar 2004
The claimant was a social work student. He attended a work experience placement, and challenged the report given by the defendants on that placement, saying it was discriminatory and defamatory. He appealed a strike out of his claim. Held: The occasion was one of qualified privilege. The claimant had to establish malice to defeat that … Continue reading Meade v Pugh and Another: QBD 5 Mar 2004
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
Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust: CA 16 Mar 2005
The claimant had sought damages against his employer, saying that they had failed in their duty to him under the 1997 Act in failing to prevent harassment by a manager. He appealed a strike out of his claim. Held: The appeal succeeded. The issue is whether an employer may be vicariously liable under section 3 … Continue reading Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust: CA 16 Mar 2005
Regina v Commission for Racial Equality (ex parte Westminster City Council): QBD 1984
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
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
Page v Freight Hire (Tank Haulage) Ltd: EAT 1981
The complainant was a female lorry driver, aged 23, employed by a firm specialising in the carriage of chemicals. One chemical was potentially embryotoxic, and the manufacturers warned that special precautions should be taken to avoid women of child-bearing age being exposed to it. The employers therefore refused to allow the complainant to drive lorries … Continue reading Page v Freight Hire (Tank Haulage) Ltd: EAT 1981
Ratcliffe and Others v North Yorkshire County Council: HL 7 Jul 1995
Three school dinner ladies had been employed by the Council at National Rates of pay and conditions. Their work which was almost exclusively carried out by females had been rated as of equal value to that of men employed by the council at various establishments. Following compulsory tendering the council declared some of the catering … Continue reading Ratcliffe and Others v North Yorkshire County Council: HL 7 Jul 1995
SPV v AM and Another: CA 27 Aug 1999
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
Moore v Marks and Spencer Plc: EAT 17 May 2010
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Amendment The Employment Judge did not err in refusing an application, in the form of a new claim, to amend to add claims out of time under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the Maternity Employment Tribunal Regulations. It was still open to the Claimant to have her second claim, … Continue reading Moore v Marks and Spencer Plc: EAT 17 May 2010
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
A v West Yorkshire Police: HL 6 May 2004
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
Stewart v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 29 Jul 2011
The court considered the arrangements for providing public support for the costs of funerals. The claimant’s son had died whilst she was in prison. Assistance had been refused because, as a prisoner, she was not receiving benefits. She complained that the refusal violated her right not to be discriminated against. Held: The prisoner’s appeal failed. … Continue reading Stewart v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 29 Jul 2011
Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Khan: HL 11 Oct 2001
The claimant was a police sergeant. After many years he had not been promoted. He began proceedings for race discrimination. Whilst those were in course, he applied for a post elsewhere. That force wrote to his own requesting a reference. In the light of the discrimination claim, they were advised not to reply for fear … Continue reading Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Khan: HL 11 Oct 2001
E, Regina (on The Application of) v Governing Body of JFS and Another: SC 16 Dec 2009
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
A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004
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
St Helens Borough Council v Derbyshire and others: HL 25 Apr 2007
The claimants were pursuing an action for equal pay. Several others settled their own actions, and the respondents then wrote direct to the claimants expressing their concern that the action ws being continued and its possible effects. The claimants said that this amounted to victimisation. Held: The employees’ appeal succeeded. The letter amounted to unfair … Continue reading St Helens Borough Council v Derbyshire and others: HL 25 Apr 2007
James v Eastleigh Borough Council: HL 14 Jun 1990
Result Decides Dscrimination not Motive The Council had allowed free entry to its swimming pools to those of pensionable age (ie women of 60 and men of 65). A 61 year old man successfully complained of sexual discrimination. Held: The 1975 Act directly discriminated between men and women by treating women more favourably on the … Continue reading James v Eastleigh Borough Council: HL 14 Jun 1990
Webb v EMO Air Cargo: ECJ 14 Jul 1994
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
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
AC v Berkshire West Primary Care Trust, Equality and Human Rights Commissions intervening: Admn 25 May 2010
The claimant, a male to female transsexual, challenged a decision by the respondent to refuse breast augmentation treatment. The Trust had a policy ‘GRS is a Low Priority treatment due to the limited evidence of clinical effectiveness and is not routinely funded.’ Held: The claim for judicial review failed. There was no general medical concensus … Continue reading AC v Berkshire West Primary Care Trust, Equality and Human Rights Commissions intervening: Admn 25 May 2010
Attridge Law (A Firm of Solicitors) v Coleman and Law: EAT 20 Dec 2006
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 . .
Bull and Another v Hall and Another: SC 27 Nov 2013
The court was asked ‘Is it lawful for a Christian hotel keeper, who sincerely believes that sexual relations outside marriage are sinful, to refuse a double-bedded room to a same sex couple?’ The defendants (Mr and Mrs Bull) appealed against a . .
Brown v Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council: HL 1989
The House construed the statutory provisions relating to the return of a female employee after maternity leave.
Held: The legislation provided ‘special protection for the security of employment of pregnant women’. ‘It was the Employment . .
Regina v Moloney: HL 1985
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 . .
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