Judges:
Morison P J
Citations:
[1997] UKEAT 16 – 96 – 1301
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – 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 . .
Cited by:
At EAT – London Underground Limited v Edwards (2) CA 21-May-1998
New rosters for underground train drivers were indirectly discriminatory because all the men could comply with them but not all the women could do so: it was a ‘striking fact’ that not a single man was disadvantaged despite the overwhelming . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.207126
