Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Discrimination - From: 1994 To: 1994

This page lists 30 cases, and was prepared on 27 May 2018.


 
 Chapman and Another v Simon; CA 1994 - [1993] EWCA Civ 37; [1994] IRLR 124
 
Lindsay v Ironsides Ray and Vials Times, 27 January 1994; [1994] IRLR 318; [1994] ICR 384
27 Jan 1994
EAT
Mummery P
Employment, Discrimination
The industrial tribunal had refused the applicant an extension of time. Held: The Tribunal mistook the law in holding that it could grant a review of its decision because the employee's case had not been properly argued at the preliminary hearing as a result of her representative's shortcomings. It would not be in the interests of justice for there to be a review on such grounds. Even though the 'interests of justice' ground for review is in very wide terms, it must be cautiously exercised. Failings of a representative will not generally constitute a ground for review because that would risk encouraging disappointed applicants to seek to re-argue cases by blaming their representatives.
Resort to this ground of review should be limited to cases of: "a "procedural mishap" or "procedural shortcoming," or "procedural occurrence" of a kind which constitutes a denial to a party of a fair and proper opportunity to present a case." and "Failings of a party's representatives, professional or otherwise, will not generally constitute a ground for review. That is a dangerous path to follow. It involves the risk of encouraging a disappointed applicant to seek to reargue his case by blaming his representative for the failure of his claim. That may involve the tribunal in inappropriate investigations into the competence of the representative who is not present at or represented at the review. If there is a justified complaint against the representative, that may be the subject of other proceedings and procedure. It is thus our view that the industrial tribunal erred in law in granting a review under rule 10(1)(e) of the Rules of Procedure of 1985."
Race Relations Act 1968 68(1) - Industrial Tribunals (Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1985
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Burghartz v Switzerland; ECHR 22-Feb-1994 - Times, 08 April 1994; [1994] ECHR 2; 16213/90; (1994) 18 EHRR 101

 
 Roks and others v Bestuur van de Bedrijfsvereniging voor de Gezondheid, Geestelijke en Maatschappelijke Belangen; ECJ 24-Feb-1994 - C-343/92; [1996] EUECJ C-343/92D; [1994] 2 CMLR 325

 
 Regina v Secretary of State Employment, ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission and Another; HL 4-Mar-1994 - Times, 04 March 1994; Gazette, 11 May 1994; Independent, 09 March 1994; [1994] 2 WLR 409; [1994] IRLR 176; [1995] 1 AC 1; [1994] 1 ALL ER 910; [1994] ICR 307; [1994] UKHL 2; (1994) 92 LGR 360
 
James v Bank of England [1994] UKEAT 226_94_1304
13 Apr 1994
EAT

Employment, Discrimination

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Meikle v Nottingham City Council [1994] UKEAT 249_92_1404
14 Apr 1994
EAT
Mummery P J
Employment, Discrimination
The appellant challenged dismissal of her claim for indirect racial discrimination based on two grounds. First, that the Tribunal's decision was perverse; in other words that it was a decision which, on the evidence before it, no reasonable tribunal could have reached. Secondly, that the Tribunal failed to interpret the law relating to indirect discrimination correctly.
Race Relations Act 1976 1(1)(a)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Stewart v Cleveland Guest (Engineering) Ltd; EAT 4-May-1994 - Ind Summary, 19 September 1994; Times, 06 July 1994; [1994] IRLR 440; [1994] UKEAT 683_93_0405

 
 Habermann-Beltermann v Arbeiterwohlfahrt; ECJ 5-May-1994 - C-421/92; [1994] EUECJ C-421/92
 
British Coal Corporation and Others, North Yorkshire County Council v Ratcliffe and Others Times, 11 May 1994; Independent, 11 May 1994
11 May 1994
CA

Discrimination
School catering assistants did work which had been valued equally with that of men, but their jobs had been contracted out to direct service companies who paid them less. Held: Market pressure which required the payment of lower wages to women was a 'material factor' and the worse treatment did not arise from a difference of sex. The applicant had to show that the full terms of comparitors were the same. Mere similarity was insufficient.
Equal Pay Act 1970 1(3)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
British Coal Corporation v Smith and Others Ind Summary, 16 May 1994
16 May 1994
CA

Employment, Discrimination
No disassociation was found despite few comparitors and history no objective distinction.
Equal Pay Act 1970 208

 
Mukoro v European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and Another Times, 02 June 1994
2 Jun 1994
EAT

Discrimination
An international organisation is immune from a Race Relations action in the Industrial Tribunal.
International Organisations Act 1968

 
Regina v South Hams District Council, ex parte Gibb and Another, Regina v Gloucester Cc, ex parte Davies Independent, 15 June 1994; Times, 08 June 1994; Gazette, 07 September 1994; [1995] QB 158
8 Jun 1994
CA
Neill and Leggatt LJJ
Housing, Discrimination
The meaning of 'Gypsy' under the Act requires some element of travelling, and should include that this was associated with the means of earning a living. In applying the statutory definition of gypsies the actual words used are to be used, taking account of the purpose of the Act and the duty imposed The are relevant (1) The links within the group and with other groups who might visit. Living and travelling together in cohesive groups is a feature of nomadic peoples. (2) The pattern of the journeys. Though a group may have a permanent residence (Greenwich v. Powell …), a nomadic habit involves travelling. Since the duty relates to the provision of accommodation 'for gypsies residing in or resorting to' the area it is relevant to inquire whether the group visits regularly. (3) The purpose of the travel. The word 'nomadic' no longer has any connection with the concept of 'seeking pasture,' but in the Act the word 'nomadic' adds to the words 'habit of life' a sense of purpose for the travelling. 'habit of life' also involves purposive activities including work and that travel forms part of that habit of life.
Caravan Sites Act 1968 6 16
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Webb v EMO Air Cargo; ECJ 14-Jul-1994 - Times, 15 July 1994; Ind Summary, 01 August 1994; [1994] 2 CMLR 729; [1994] 4 All ER 115; [1994] 3 WLR 941; [1994] ICR 770; C-32/93; (1994) QB 718; [1994] ECR I-03567; [1994] EUECJ C-32/93; [1994] IRLR 482
 
Karlheinz Schmidt v Germany [1994] ECHR 22; 13580/88; [1994] 18 EHRR 513
18 Jul 1994
ECHR

Human Rights, Discrimination
Article 14 of the Convention operates not by way of the conferral of a freestanding right not to be discriminated against, but rather by way of complementing the other substantive provisions of the Convention and the Protocols. It has no independent existence, since it has effect solely in relation to the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms safeguarded by those other provisions.
European Convention on Human Rghts 14
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Dyfed County Council Ex Parte S (Minors) Independent, 12 August 1994; Times, 25 July 1994
25 Jul 1994
CA

Education, Discrimination
No objection was to be taken for English children sent to mainly Welsh speaking school. They were not entitled to transport to a school with a greater number of English speakers.
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Ministry of Defence v Cannock and Others; EAT 2-Aug-1994 - Independent, 15 September 1994; Times, 02 August 1994; [1994] ICR 918
 
Barclays Bank Plc v Kapur and Others Ind Summary, 15 August 1994
15 Aug 1994
CA

Discrimination
Whether there has been discrimination is independent and irrespective of the discriminator's motives.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Rovenska v General Medical Council Independent, 22 September 1994; [1994] UKEAT 163_93_1103
22 Sep 1994
EAT
Mummery J
Discrimination, Employment
The complainant said that the respondent's rules imposing language skills testing on doctors with recognised foreign qualifications were discriminatory. Held: Discriminatory rules are a continuing act and the complaint was not barred by time limit. The complaint was not time-barred because it was: "about the maintenance and operation of a scheme for exemption which extends over a period, that period being the currency of the scheme or rules."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Fisscher v Voorhuis Hengelo and Stichting Bedrijfspensioenfonds voor de Detailhandel C-128/93; [1994] ECR I-4583; [1994] EUECJ C-128/93; [1995] ICR 635
28 Sep 1994
ECJ

European, Employment, Discrimination
Europa The right to join an occupational pension scheme, the rules of which were not laid down directly by law but were the result of negotiation between both sides of the industry concerned and all that the public authorities did was, at the request of such employers' and trade union organizations as were considered to be representative, to declare the scheme compulsory for the whole of the industry concerned, is covered by the concept of pay within the meaning of Article 119 of the Treaty with the result that it is subject to the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex laid down by that article. It follows that an occupational pension scheme which, by excluding married women from membership, operates discrimination directly based on sex, contravenes Article 119 of the Treaty.
The limitation of the effects in time of the judgment of 17 May 1990 in Case C-262/88 Barber concerns only those kinds of discrimination which employers and pension schemes could reasonably have considered to be permissible owing to the transitional derogations for which Community law provided and which were capable of being applied to occupational pensions. This does not cover discrimination in relation to membership of occupational pension schemes held to be unlawful under Article 119 of the Treaty in the judgment of 13 May 1986 in Case 170/84 Bilka which itself contained no temporal limitation of its effects. In the absence of such a limitation, the direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty can be relied upon in order retroactively to claim equal treatment in relation to the right to join an occupational pension scheme and this may be done as from 8 April 1976, the date of the judgment in Case 43/75 Defrenne in which the Court held for the first time that Article 119 has direct effect. However, the fact that a worker can claim retroactively to join an occupational pension scheme does not allow the worker to avoid paying the contributions relating to the period of membership concerned. The national rules relating to time-limits for bringing actions under national law may be relied on against workers who assert their right to join an occupational pension scheme, provided that they are not less favourable for that type of action than for similar actions of a domestic nature and that they do not render the exercise of rights conferred by Community law impossible in practice.
Europa
Although not party to the employment relationship, the administrators of an occupational pension scheme are called upon to pay out benefits which constitute pay within the meaning of Article 119 and, like any employer, must therefore comply with that provision by doing all within their powers to ensure that the principle of equal treatment is observed in this respect and scheme members must be able to rely upon it as against them. The effectiveness of Article 119 would be considerably diminished and the legal protection required to achieve real equality would be impaired if an employee could rely on that provision only as against the employer and not against the administrators of the scheme who are expressly charged with performing the employer' s obligations.
The Protocol on Article 119 of the Treaty, annexed to the Treaty on European Union, concerns all benefits paid by an occupational social security scheme but not the right to join such a scheme. The question of membership is thus governed by the judgment of 13 May 1986 in Case 170/84 Bilka, according to which an undertaking which, without objective justification unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex, accords different treatment to men and women by excluding a category of employees from a company pension scheme infringes Article 119 of the Treaty.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Coloroll Pension Trustees v Russell and others (Judgment) Times, 30 November 1994; C-200/91; [1994] EUECJ C-200/91; [1994] OPLR 179
28 Sep 1994
ECJ

Discrimination, European
The trustees of a pension fund have the same equal treatment obligations as do employers. The effect of the judgment in Barber was that: "i) For pensionable service prior to 17 May 1990 (the date of the Barber judgment) it was not unlawful for male and female pension benefits to be provided at different retirement ages;
ii) A scheme could be amended so as to equalise benefits for men and women, if the rules of the scheme permitted such amendment. The nature of the amendment could either reduce the normal male retirement age, or increase the normal female retirement age, or both; provided that both sexes were treated equally;
iii) For pensionable service between 17 May 1990 and the operative date of any valid amendment male members of a pension scheme were entitled to be treated as if their normal retirement age was the same age as that applicable to female members (usually 60). This period is known, in the jargon, as "the Barber window"."
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Vroege v NCIV Instituut voor Volkshuisvesting B V C-57/93; [1994] ECR I-4541
28 Sep 1994
ECJ

European, Discrimination, Employment, Benefits
Europa The right to join an occupational pension scheme, the rules of which were not laid down directly by law but were the result of negotiation between both sides of the industry concerned and all that the public authorities did was, at the request of such employers' and trade union organizations as were considered to be representative, to declare the scheme compulsory for the whole of the industry concerned, is covered by the concept of pay within the meaning of Article 119 of the Treaty with the result that it is subject to the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex laid down by that article. It follows that an occupational pension scheme which by excluding married women from membership operates discrimination directly based on sex contravenes Article 119 of the Treaty. Where the exclusion concerns part-time workers, that provision is contravened only if the exclusion affects a greater number of women than men unless the employer shows that it may be explained by objectively justified factors unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex.
The limitation of the effects in time of the judgment of 17 May 1990 in Case C-262/88 Barber concerns only those kinds of discrimination which employers and pension schemes could reasonably have considered to be permissible owing to the transitional derogations for which Community law provided and which were capable of being applied to occupational pensions. This does not cover discrimination in relation to membership of occupational pension schemes held to be unlawful under Article 119 of the Treaty in the judgment of 13 May 1986 in Case 170/84 Bilka which itself contained no temporal limitation of its effects. In the absence of such a limitation, whose later introduction is in any event excluded, the direct effect of Article 119 of the Treaty can be relied upon in order retroactively to claim equal treatment in relation to the right to join an occupational pension scheme and this may be done as from 8 April 1976, the date of the judgment in Case 43/75 Defrenne in which the Court held for the first time that Article 119 has direct effect.
The Protocol on Article 119 of the Treaty, annexed to the Treaty on European Union, concerns all benefits paid by an occupational social security scheme but not the right to join such a scheme. The question of membership is thus governed by the judgment of 13 May 1986 in Case 170/84 Bilka according to which an undertaking which, without objective justification unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex, accords different treatment to men and women by excluding a category of employees from a company pension scheme infringes Article 119 of the Treaty.
1 Citers


 
Morris v Zoom Photographic Ltd [1994] UKEAT 529_94_1710
17 Oct 1994
EAT
Hull QC HHJ
Employment, Discrimination

Sex Discrimination Act 1975
[ Bailii ]
 
National Union of Teachers and Others v St Mary's Church Of England Junior School and Others [1994] UKEAT 905_93_0211; [1995] ICR 317
2 Nov 1994
EAT
Mummery J
Employment, European, Discrimination
EAT Whether the Acquired Rights Directive EC77/187 ("the Directive") is enforceable against the governing body of a voluntary aided school, as an emanation of the State within the meaning ascribed to that expression by the European Court of Justice in Foster v. British Gas Plc [1991] 2 AC 306.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Secretary of State for Social Security Ex Parte Nessa Gazette, 08 February 1995; Times, 15 November 1994
15 Nov 1994
QBD

Discrimination, Benefits
Regulations under which payments were made for funeral benefits were not susceptible to a challenge under the Race Relations Act, since they were an act of the Crown.
Race Relations Act 1976 20
1 Citers


 
Waters v Commissioner of Police of Metropolis [1994] UKEAT 785_92_1711
17 Nov 1994
EAT

Employment, Discrimination

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Smith and Others v Avdel Systems Ltd Times, 30 November 1994
30 Nov 1994
ECJ

Discrimination, European
Financial hardship doesn't justify unequal treatment of sexes on pensions.

 
Elsie Rita Johnson v Chief Adjudication Officer C-410/92; [1994] EUECJ C-410/92; [1995] ICR 375
6 Dec 1994
ECJ

European, Benefits, Discrimination
Europa Social policy - Equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security - Directive 79/7 - Article 4(1) - Direct effect - National legislation limiting the period prior to the bringing of a claim for benefit for incapacity for work in respect of which arrears are payable - Whether permissible - Directive not properly transposed prior to the bringing of the claim - Not relevant (Council Directive 79/7, Art. 4(1))
The right conferred on women by the direct effect of Article 4(1) of Directive 79/7 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security to claim benefits for incapacity for work under the same conditions as men must be exercised under the conditions determined by national law, provided that those conditions are no less favourable than those relating to similar domestic actions and that they are not framed so as to render virtually impossible the exercise of rights conferred by Community law. It follows that, in so far as those conditions are satisfied, Community law does not preclude the application, to a claim based on the direct effect of Directive 79/7, of a rule of national law which merely limits the period prior to the bringing of the claim in respect of which arrears of benefit are payable, even where that directive has not been properly transposed within the prescribed period in the Member State concerned.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Smith v Safeway Plc Ind Summary, 16 January 1995; Times, 16 December 1994; [1994] UKEAT 185_93_0912
9 Dec 1994
EAT

Discrimination, Employment
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.
Sex Discrimination Act 1975
[ Bailii ]
 
Stadt Lengerich and others v Helmig and others (Judgment) C-399/92; [1994] ECR I-5727; [1994] EUECJ C-399/92
15 Dec 1994
ECJ

European, Discrimination
Europa The Court of Justice is in principle bound to give a preliminary ruling if the questions raised by the national court or tribunal, which is best placed to appreciate, in the light of the circumstances of the case, the necessity of obtaining a preliminary ruling, have to do with the interpretation of a provision of Community law. In particular, the Court cannot refuse to supply the national court with the elements of Community law which it seeks on the basis of the argument that the ruling might lead the court to annul national provisions and thus create a legal vacuum in national law. Article 119 of the Treaty and Article 1 of Directive 75/117 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the application of the principle of equal pay for men and women does not prevent collective agreements from restricting payment of overtime supplements, for both part -time and full-time employees, to cases where the normal working hours fixed by them are exceeded, excluding hours worked in excess of the hours fixed by individual contracts. Such rules do not result in part-time employees being treated differently to full-time employees because the former receive the same overall pay as full-time employees for the same number of hours worked, whether or not the normal working hours fixed by collective agreement are exceeded, overtime supplements being paid to all categories of employees only when those normal working hours are exceeded.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.