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
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 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
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 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 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 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 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 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 – 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 Practice and Procedure – Compromise1. On the true construction of a compromise agreement in respect of claims arising on the termination of the contract of employment, claims arising during the relationship and arising otherwise than on termination were not compromised. The agreement did not meet the industry standard for such model agreements.2. Further the … Continue reading Palihakkara v British Telecommunications Plc: EAT 9 Oct 2006
The 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
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
Appeal agaiinst extension of time given for filing sex discrimination case. Judges: Mummery J P Citations: [1995] UKEAT 1225 – 95 – 2012 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 7691) Employment, Discrimination Updated: 19 June 2022; Ref: scu.209601
The claimant had brought a sex discrimination claim, saying that she had bee refused opportunity to work as a chef with the Royal Marines. She and the defendants had had sought an adjournment of the claim, but this had been refused. Held: Appeal allowed. Judges: Hicks QC HHJ Citations: [1995] UKEAT 978 – 95 – … Continue reading Sirdar v Ministry of Defence: EAT 15 Sep 1995
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
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
Judges: Byrt QC HHJ Citations: [1998] UKEAT 351 – 98 – 0103 Links: Bailii Citing: See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 30-Jul-1997 . . Cited by: See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 15-Dec-1999 EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal . .See Also – Unwin v Sackville School … Continue reading Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 1 Mar 1998
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal Judges: His Honour Judge Peter Clark Citations: [1999] UKEAT 1068 – 98 – 1512, EAT/1068/98, EAT/1314/98 Links: Bailii, EAT Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 30-Jul-1997 . . See Also – Unwin v Sackville School and Another EAT 1-Mar-1998 . … Continue reading Unwin v Sackville School and Another: EAT 15 Dec 1999
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
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
News Group Newspapers Ltd had been joined as a party, in order that it could argue the obvious public interest relating to the importance, which has long been accepted in the courts, of the interest, not just of the press but of the public generally, in freedom of reporting and openness in court hearings. Discrimination … Continue reading Chessington World of Adventures Ltd v Reed: EAT 27 Jun 1997
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
80% of the men who had been employed since 1 April 1997 had got protection under TUPE whereas only 66.66% of the women had. It was argued that this difference in percentages was sufficient to justify a claim of indirect discrimination. Held: There was no sex discrimination where there were genuine reasons for a pay … Continue reading Strathclyde Regional Council and others v Wallace and others (Scotland): HL 22 Jan 1998
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
A new driver roster imposing shift working timetables discriminated against women since significantly less in proportion of women could meet the new arrangements – indirect discrimination Citations: Times 01-Jun-1998, Gazette 24-Jun-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 876, (1998) IRLR 364 Links: Bailii Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – London Underground … Continue reading London Underground Limited v Edwards: CA 21 May 1998
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
The applicant was recruited in Saudi Arabia in 1986 as a flight attendant under a contract expressed to be subject to Saudi Arabian law. After being trained in Jeddah, and then employed in India for four years, she was transferred to be based in London, from which all her tours of duty as a flight … Continue reading Carver (Nee Mascarenhas) v Saudi Arabian Airlines: CA 17 Mar 1999
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 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
The dismissal by a Roman Catholic school of a teacher who was pregnant by a priest, was on the grounds of pregnancy, and for an inadmissible reason. The pregnancy was an effective cause of the adverse treatment of the Appellant by her employer. Judges: Mummery P Citations: Gazette 12-Sep-1996, Times 07-Jun-1996, [1996] IRLR 372, [1996] … Continue reading O’Neill v Governors of St Thomas More Roman Catholic Voluntary Aided Upper School: EAT 7 Jun 1996
A woman who had taken maternity leave was deemed to have returned to work following the completion of that leave when, on the appropriate date she provided medical certificates in accordance with the contract of employment. The applicant had given notice of her intention to return after maternity leave, but obtained an extension of four … Continue reading Halfpenny v IGE Medical Systems Ltd: HL 19 Dec 2000
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
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
The plaintiffs, who were both women, wanted to stand and drink at the bar in the defendants’ wine bar but the barman refused to serve them and said that, if they sat at a table, the drinks would be brought to them. That was because only men were permitted to stand and drink at the … Continue reading Gill v El Vino Co Ltd: CA 1983
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
It was not sex discrimination to calculate severance pay for an employee on her current part time earnings. Citations: Times 25-Oct-1996 Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 6(2) Citing: See Also – Barry v Midland Bank Plc EAT 2-Feb-1996 Appeal from rejection of sex discrimination claim . . Cited by: Appeal from – Barry v Midland … Continue reading Barry v Midland Bank Plc: EAT 25 Oct 1996
A woman school technician was subjected to a campaign of sexual harassment by two fellow male non-managerial technicians. She sought a transfer. Held: The real question was whether the sexual harassment was to the detriment of the applicant within section 6(2)(b). The claim of sex discrimination succeeded.Lord McDonald said: ‘It was argued on behalf of … Continue reading Porcelli v Strathclyde Regional Council: EAT 1985
A rent officer, although holding a statutory office and not in employment, came within section 85(2)(b) because she performed services on behalf of the Crown for the purposes of a statutory body, namely a rent assessment committee. Judges: Slynn J Citations: [1980] 1 All ER 58 Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 85(2)(b) Cited by: Cited … Continue reading Department of the Environment v Fox: 1980
The court considered the meaning of ‘detriment’ in discrimination law. Brightman LJ said: ‘I think a detriment exists if a reasonable worker would or might take the view that the duty was in all the circumstances to his detriment.’Lord Justice Brandon said: ‘I do not regard the expression ‘subjecting . . to any other detriment’ … Continue reading Ministry of Defence v Jeremiah: CA 1980
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
The applicant had been taken on to stand in for an employee taking maternity leave. She herself became pregnant, and she was dismissed. Her clam for sex discrimination had been rejected by the industrial tribunal and EAT. Held: Since a man who had been recruited in the same situation would have been dismissed if he … Continue reading Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd: CA 20 Dec 1991
The appellant, a male delicatessen assistant, was dismissed by his employers because his hair, which he wore in a ponytail style, breached the employers’ rules for male staff, which stipulated tidy hair not below collar length and no unconventional hair styles. Held: He had not been discriminated against on the grounds of sex. A dress … Continue reading Smith v Safeway Plc: CA 5 Mar 1996
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
A judge’s status does not bring her within the scope of the 1975 Act as an ’employee’. Citations: [1979] ICR 194 Statutes: Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – O’Brien v Department for Constitutional Affairs CA 19-Dec-2008 The claimant was a part time recorder. He claimed to be entitled to … Continue reading Knight v Attorney General: 1979
Female teachers carried out the work of principal teachers but had not been appointed to the promoted post and were paid less than they would have received had they been so appointed. They claimed equal pay with male comparators who were appointed principal teachers. Like work was established and it was agreed that disparity in … Continue reading Strathclyde Regional Council v Wallace: HL 1988
(Commision) The applicant was a devout Muslim. His religious duty was to offer prayers on Fridays and to attend a mosque if possible. He was employed as a full time primary school teacher. He complained that he was forced to resign because he was refused permission to attend a mosque for the purposes of worship … Continue reading Ahmad v United Kingdom: ECHR 1981
A female art teacher and deputy department head applied in 1975 to be department head at her school. In September a man was appointed instead. The 1975 Act came into force on 29th December. On 1st January 1996 she complained to the Tribunal on the basis that by appointing a man the employers discriminated against … Continue reading Amies v Inner London Education Authority: EAT 1977
The question arose as whether the Inland Revenue were concerned with the provision of services in their activities relating to the adminsitration of the taxation system, so as to bring them within section 20 of the 1976 Act. Held: They were providing services.Templeman LJ said: ‘The Race Relations Act 1976 undoubtedly poses and is continually … Continue reading Savjani v Inland Revenue Commissioners: CA 1981
The applicant was a cashier on a ship. She made a complaint of sex harassment and discrimination. The defendant denied that the court had jurisdiction because she worked abroad. Held: Her work was done mainly outside Great Britain. Neill LJ said: ‘Thus s10(1) provides in effect that for the purposes of Part II all employment … Continue reading Haughton v Olau Line (UK) Ltd: CA 1986
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
Where an Industrial Tribunal’s decision could not be reviewed because under the rules, the new evidence had been available, a review based on the new evidence should only be granted where there existed some mitigation causing the failure to bring the matter within the rules, rather than the nature of the dispute at large, making … Continue reading General Council of British Shipping v Deria and Others: 1985
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
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
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
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
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
Discrimination was alleged against the immigration authorities. Held: In dealing with people coming in under the immigration rules, the immigration authorities were not providing ‘services’ within the meaning of the Act. The words the ‘circumstances relevant for the purposes of any provision of this Act’ are the circumstances in which discrimination is prohibited by the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Ex parte Kassam: CA 1980
The applicant had soft tissue injuries around the spine as a consequence of a back injury at work. He was absent from work for a long time as a result of his injuries, and he was eventually dismissed when his medical advisers could provide no clear idea of when it would be possible for him … Continue reading Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999
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
The employer appealed against a decision by the tribunal that it had jurisdiction to hear the complaints of sex discrimination. The tribunal had extended the time for the claim on the just and equitable basis. Held: The EAT set out five criteria for answering whether to extend time: ‘(a) the length of and reasons for … Continue reading British Coal Corporation v Keeble and others: EAT 26 Mar 1997
The 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
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
The claimant had lodged an appeal against a rejection of her claim of sex discrimination, and against the amount of damages awarded on the success of her claim of unfair dismissal. After rejection of her request for a review, her counsel had lodged a letter withdrawing her appeal. She then received a reply from the … Continue reading O’Neill v Governors of St Thomas More RC School: EAT 12 Oct 1995
There had been a trial of 35 days regarding rights of way over land, which had proved fruitless, and where some orders had been made without jurisdiction. The result had been inconclusive. The costs order was now appealed, the plaintiff complaining that the judge had failed to take into account an offer of settlement made … Continue reading Cutts v Head and Another: CA 7 Dec 1983
Same Sex Paartner to Inherit as Family Member The claimant had lived with the original tenant in a stable and long standing homosexual relationship at the deceased’s flat. After the tenant’s death he sought a statutory tenancy as a spouse of the deceased. The Act had been extended to include as a spouse someone living … Continue reading Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd: HL 28 Oct 1999
The plaintiff was used to going swimming. He was 60. He complained that whereas his wife, of the same age was admitted free, he had had to pay .75p. He claimed sex discrimination. Held: Though his claim failed, Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson V-C said: ‘it is not permissible for a defendant in such a case to … Continue reading James v Eastleigh Borough Council: CA 1985
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
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
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
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
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 applicant complained that she was dismissed when her employers learned that she was pregnant. Held: 1(1) (a) and 5(3) of the 1975 Act were to be interpreted as meaning that where a woman had been engaged for an indefinite period, the fact that pregnancy was the reason for her temporary unavailability at a time … Continue reading Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 2): HL 20 Oct 1995
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
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Review UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Constructive dismissal SEX DISCRIMINATION: Direct Two appeals in respect of two matters heard together by the Employment Tribunal:(i) Review Appeal: the Tribunal applied the wrong legal tests and/or erred in law and/or was perverse in dismissing the Appellant’s application for Review by reference to fresh evidence and/or the … Continue reading F and C Asset Management Plc and others v Switalski: EAT 9 Dec 2008
The claimant was a part time recorder. He claimed to be entitled to a judicial pension. Held: The Employment Appeal Tribunal was wrong to find an error of law in the decision of the Employment Tribunal to extend time; but the court declined to remit the case to the Employment Tribunal for a substantive hearing … Continue reading O’Brien v Department for Constitutional Affairs: CA 19 Dec 2008
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
