EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke
Amendment
SEX DISCRIMINATION
Pregnancy and discrimination
Direct
The Employment Tribunal failed to determine claims for indirect discrimination and harassment made to it, did not set out the law (other than to say it ‘paid regard to it’), and appeared to mis-state the principles deriving from Fletcher and Others v NHS Pensions Agency and Another [2005] ICR 1458. Nor did it give reasons for its central conclusions of fact. It appeared to accept that if a woman on maternity leave is subjected to disadvantage whilst on leave, the disadvantage being related to her maternity, that is necessarily sex discrimination: it failed to ask why the treatment, constituting that disadvantage, had been afforded to her. Such were the failures of the Employment Tribunal that the matter had to be remitted. As to that, secondary issues arose as to whether the Claimant should have cross-appealed the failure to make findings on some claims.
Judges:
Langstaff J
Citations:
[2011] UKEAT 0483 – 10 – 1210
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450261